Q: What should I be posting about? A: Basically, anything you want to talk about but aren't sure if it warrants a topic of its own. Heard a rumour you want to share? A new video? A question you are sure is super common but can't find the answer to via searching? A brilliant new idea that you want to vet, to make sure it's really as brilliant as you think it is?
This is the place.
Note: Posting standards will not be as high as if you were to make a new thread, but pointless spam will still not be tolerated. I have seen threads like these work out alright on other sites (for other games) so I figured, why not give it a shot? It's possible there's not really enough content for something like this to exist at this point in time, but no harm then, it will just die on its own.
I've been wondering lately, when discussing balance in Starcraft 2, are the debates similar to those had during Starcraft 1? Having never played other than recently picking up the anthology to play the campaign, I have little knowledge of BW other than it was balanced. How long into its lifecycle was it before people stopped talking about how 'broken' the game was? Considering SC2 is still young with 2 expansions ahead of it, balance will still be a big discussion for years to come.
Also, how much did Brood War change the original Starcraft in terms of balance right out of the box? The new units must have changed the metagame a lot.
Does anyone know why Irradiate was removed? I think if Ravens still had that, they would see use. I just don't understand the decision for it. Is it because of the clumping effect being stronger in SC2?
On June 05 2011 21:15 Bleak wrote: Does anyone know why Irradiate was removed? I think if Ravens still had that, they would see use. I just don't understand the decision for it. Is it because of the clumping effect being stronger in SC2?
I'd assume so yeah seeing how powerful irradiate vs mutas was - ofc it wouldn't be THAT powerful vs say marines etc. but I can understand why they didn't want it in.
On June 05 2011 21:15 Bleak wrote: Does anyone know why Irradiate was removed? I think if Ravens still had that, they would see use. I just don't understand the decision for it. Is it because of the clumping effect being stronger in SC2?
I'd assume so yeah seeing how powerful irradiate vs mutas was - ofc it wouldn't be THAT powerful vs say marines etc. but I can understand why they didn't want it in.
I think it's more of the fact that the average player would have whined ceaselessly about how OP it is, because they wouldn't be able to handle the idea of splitting their mutalisks. I'm pretty sure that's why the reaver isn't there either. In two seconds, your entire mineral line can disappear, and I'd imagine that they didn't want the average player to have to deal with that.
On June 05 2011 21:15 Bleak wrote: Does anyone know why Irradiate was removed? I think if Ravens still had that, they would see use. I just don't understand the decision for it. Is it because of the clumping effect being stronger in SC2?
Irradiate damages the unit itself and all around it. That would be much too powerful with the new supersmart movement AI which allows very tight concentrations of units.
The seeker missile is its replacement, but not really worth it in its current stage, because its too easy to dodge and extremely expensive at 125 energy.
On June 05 2011 21:15 Bleak wrote: Does anyone know why Irradiate was removed? I think if Ravens still had that, they would see use. I just don't understand the decision for it. Is it because of the clumping effect being stronger in SC2?
Irradiate damages the unit itself and all around it. That would be much too powerful with the new supersmart movement AI which allows very tight concentrations of units.
The seeker missile is its replacement, but not really worth it in its current stage, because its too easy to dodge and extremely expensive at 125 energy.
I don't know about it being too powerful with stacking around. You could minimize the effect by magic boxing your mutas around a T with irradiate. You have to be wary of stacking around thors, this would be no different. One volley from a thor would probably do the same damage as an irradiate for most decent players. You'd just have to separate the mutalisk, and then go back to attacking.
On June 05 2011 21:15 Bleak wrote: Does anyone know why Irradiate was removed? I think if Ravens still had that, they would see use. I just don't understand the decision for it. Is it because of the clumping effect being stronger in SC2?
I'd assume so yeah seeing how powerful irradiate vs mutas was - ofc it wouldn't be THAT powerful vs say marines etc. but I can understand why they didn't want it in.
I think it's more of the fact that the average player would have whined ceaselessly about how OP it is, because they wouldn't be able to handle the idea of splitting their mutalisks. I'm pretty sure that's why the reaver isn't there either. In two seconds, your entire mineral line can disappear, and I'd imagine that they didn't want the average player to have to deal with that.
I highly doubt that's why the Reaver got removed seeing as Banelings and blueflame Hellions are in the game. And with Hellions it's so bad you can't even run away your workers towards your army becasue of Hellions' splashdamage in that congaline and the hellions being faster.
Anyways, it's hard to say why some stuff got removed in the game and something added. To me it looks like they just wanted to make sure it wasn't SC1 with updated graphics and engine, so they removed alot of units and spells and added new ones.
Do you guys know why some pro Zerg players recently, when just beginning the game, build up about 100 minerals instead of producing drones, and then produce drones? It's odd, I believe Tastosis (or was it Day9 and DjWheat?) pointed it out at MLG when IdrA and/or Losira did it, but I don't understand it. Anyone know what was up with that?
I think it has to do with larvae production after the first overlord, having the larvae come out more evenly instead of doing the extractor trick and instantly making 2 drones after the overlord pops, but I'm not sure, doesn't quite make sense.
I'm looking for an article/post/news on teamliquid I read about 2-3 weeks ago. It was basically a top20 (or something.. could have been top100) ranking of sc2 players and an explanation as to why they deserve that rank.
I thought it was interesting, but i was in a rush so i didn't get to read it and now when i try to find it again im drawing a blank..
I asked in the previous thread just before it was closed, so Im going to ask here again: Is it allowed in competitions to use outside program to allow some hotkey combinations that are not possible to set in game (like alt+tab, space+anything)?
On June 05 2011 21:15 Bleak wrote: Does anyone know why Irradiate was removed? I think if Ravens still had that, they would see use. I just don't understand the decision for it. Is it because of the clumping effect being stronger in SC2?
I'd assume so yeah seeing how powerful irradiate vs mutas was - ofc it wouldn't be THAT powerful vs say marines etc. but I can understand why they didn't want it in.
I think it's more of the fact that the average player would have whined ceaselessly about how OP it is, because they wouldn't be able to handle the idea of splitting their mutalisks. I'm pretty sure that's why the reaver isn't there either. In two seconds, your entire mineral line can disappear, and I'd imagine that they didn't want the average player to have to deal with that.
I highly doubt that's why the Reaver got removed seeing as Banelings and blueflame Hellions are in the game. And with Hellions it's so bad you can't even run away your workers towards your army becasue of Hellions' splashdamage in that congaline and the hellions being faster.
Anyways, it's hard to say why some stuff got removed in the game and something added. To me it looks like they just wanted to make sure it wasn't SC1 with updated graphics and engine, so they removed alot of units and spells and added new ones.
That's what it looks like to me anyway.
Imagine an irradiated Thor surrounded by lings .God that would of been so awesome.
Do anyone have an explanation for the login procedure? You know when you type your password and login, you are face with a "Enter" screen with your profile in it. Why is this? Has Blizzard something planned for this screen? How does it look on the SEA server where you can play on both SEA and NA? Or is it just a remnant from the Guest login screen?
I'm sorry if this encroaches on the advertising rule, I simply really like this website for streams and want to help; I am in no way affiliated with it.
Also I would suggest reading the 10 commandments and all stickied threads that allude to Must Read. This forum tolerates little misbehavior from its members.
On June 05 2011 23:03 hashaki wrote: I highly doubt that's why the Reaver got removed seeing as Banelings and blueflame Hellions are in the game. And with Hellions it's so bad you can't even run away your workers towards your army becasue of Hellions' splashdamage in that congaline and the hellions being faster. .
My method: Select all workers, press stop (S), select idle worker (F1), quickly click F1 and random directions on the minimap to spread your workers in various directions making blue flame hellions do less damage while your army responds. Its not perfect but you never see all your workers get roasted when they make a konga line to safety.
Can someone please clue me in to how I can watch MLG VODs? I feel like I've crawled all over their site looking for a way to throw money at them to watch a season of VODs and I just can't find any such thing.
On June 06 2011 10:27 galivet wrote: Can someone please clue me in to how I can watch MLG VODs? I feel like I've crawled all over their site looking for a way to throw money at them to watch a season of VODs and I just can't find any such thing.
Not sure but I think you have to get the viewer and then you can select at the bottom left to watch the vods.
So... I have kind of felt this way since the roach got +1 (4) range buff. Zerg played correctly at the highest mechanical and strategical level is very strong. In particular against a Protoss. Discluding early to maybe mid game, I feel like even the best Zerg can generate too much income and and can either re-macro strong unit compositions too fast or stockpile and do other things.
I tried to think of a solution for this for a long time, and finally I think I may have come up with a feasible concept - Charging resources for every creep tumor put on the map (initial tumor possibley being free), and maybe charging a slow mineral rate, ala an scv repairing something, for overlords dropping creep. I have no idea what the amounts charged would be, maybe something like 25m?
Creep is free vision, free expansion denial, and free speed advantage. I think forcing the Zerg to passively spend a little of the massive amount of excess minerals they can macro up in SC2 and making creep something of "resource based value" to attack would maybe make the PvZ match up a tad bit more balanced (before the roach range increase, stalkers could harass roaches without speed and kite with good micro ect.) It also makes a stockpiled zerg a little more accountable for how he chooses to engage with units, even if they are in a "throw away army". However, I'm not sure how this would adversely effect TvZ, as creep is often quickly and easily destroyed... but it's something I have been thinking about a lot.
I'd love to hear some intelligent, non bias feedback on the idea. (if that's possible )
On June 06 2011 11:00 Vansetsu wrote: So... I have kind of felt this way since the roach got +1 (4) range buff. Zerg played correctly at the highest mechanical and strategical level is very strong. In particular against a Protoss. Discluding early to maybe mid game, I feel like even the best Zerg can generate too much income and and can either re-macro strong unit compositions too fast or stockpile and do other things.
I tried to think of a solution for this for a long time, and finally I think I may have come up with a feasible concept - Charging resources for every creep tumor put on the map (initial tumor possibley being free), and maybe charging a slow mineral rate, ala an scv repairing something, for overlords dropping creep. I have no idea what the amounts charged would be, maybe something like 25m?
Creep is free vision, free expansion denial, and free speed advantage. I think forcing the Zerg to passively spend a little of the massive amount of excess minerals they can macro up in SC2 and making creep something of "resource based value" to attack would maybe make the PvZ match up a tad bit more balanced (before the roach range increase, stalkers could harass roaches without speed and kite with good micro ect.) It also makes a stockpiled zerg a little more accountable for how he chooses to engage with units, even if they are in a "throw away army". However, I'm not sure how this would adversely effect TvZ, as creep is often quickly and easily destroyed... but it's something I have been thinking about a lot.
I'd love to hear some intelligent, non bias feedback on the idea. (if that's possible )
I really don't think a mineral cost on tumors/creep spreading would work. I really can't think of any reason why this would be good for the game. Sorry I don't have more to offer.
Do you need to have a lot of understanding of SC2 strategy to be a mod? This question popped into my mind when I noticed that certain mods almost never posted in the Strategy Forum while others spent a lot of time in it (such as Chill and Zatic).
Why aren't top Protoss players using Phenix's PvT?
I recently played PvT when i was behind after his fast expo but i was able to keep colosus alive forever because of phenix in my unit mix, and he couldn't win any engagement, eventually loosing while 1 base up over me ^^. You usually go zealot-sentry-stalker-colosus and tech to templar but if you add 1 stargate and keep making phenix you suddenly win every engagement.
You can kill vikings without suiciding your stalkers to marauder ball, and kill medivacs. Also phenixes attacking vikings allow you to move forward with colossus to deal demage and not die in few viking shots. It's much easier to micro, and terran can't go marines (you have ever growing colossus count) and if they don't transition out of marauder ball you have the ability to add VR's and roflstomp Terran even harder.
Srsly they are not expensive and you don't even need to micro them, just a move and control ground battle with FF while your Phenixes just kill anything above the ground.
So i wonder, what is the biggest weakness of incorporating phenixes into standard chargelot-sentry-stalker-colosus that pro's don't use it?
On June 06 2011 13:23 RM_12 wrote: Why aren't top Protoss players using Phenix's PvT?
I recently played PvT when i was behind after his fast expo but i was able to keep colosus alive forever because of phenix in my unit mix, and he couldn't win any engagement, eventually loosing while 1 base up over me ^^. You usually go zealot-sentry-stalker-colosus and tech to templar but if you add 1 stargate and keep making phenix you suddenly win every engagement.
You can kill vikings without suiciding your stalkers to marauder ball, and kill medivacs. Also phenixes attacking vikings allow you to move forward with colossus to deal demage and not die in few viking shots. It's much easier to micro, and terran can't go marines (you have ever growing colossus count) and if they don't transition out of marauder ball you have the ability to add VR's and roflstomp Terran even harder.
Srsly they are not expensive and you don't even need to micro them, just a move and control ground battle with FF while your Phenixes just kill anything above the ground.
So i wonder, what is the biggest weakness of incorporating phenixes into standard chargelot-sentry-stalker-colosus that pro's don't use it?
This is your erroneous assumption, and one of the main reasons players don't incorporate phoenixes into their late-game armies.
On June 06 2011 13:23 RM_12 wrote: Why aren't top Protoss players using Phenix's PvT?
I recently played PvT when i was behind after his fast expo but i was able to keep colosus alive forever because of phenix in my unit mix, and he couldn't win any engagement, eventually loosing while 1 base up over me ^^. You usually go zealot-sentry-stalker-colosus and tech to templar but if you add 1 stargate and keep making phenix you suddenly win every engagement.
You can kill vikings without suiciding your stalkers to marauder ball, and kill medivacs. Also phenixes attacking vikings allow you to move forward with colossus to deal demage and not die in few viking shots. It's much easier to micro, and terran can't go marines (you have ever growing colossus count) and if they don't transition out of marauder ball you have the ability to add VR's and roflstomp Terran even harder.
Srsly they are not expensive and you don't even need to micro them, just a move and control ground battle with FF while your Phenixes just kill anything above the ground.
So i wonder, what is the biggest weakness of incorporating phenixes into standard chargelot-sentry-stalker-colosus that pro's don't use it?
if the terran reacts well enough with 2 starport reactors then all they have to do is take out the colossus quickly before the vikings go down, emp the pheonixes, then they become useless
so basically they'll have marauders left over vs. your phoenixes with no energy
On June 06 2011 04:09 euroboy wrote: This popped up in my mind yesterday.
Do anyone have an explanation for the login procedure? You know when you type your password and login, you are face with a "Enter" screen with your profile in it. Why is this? Has Blizzard something planned for this screen? How does it look on the SEA server where you can play on both SEA and NA? Or is it just a remnant from the Guest login screen?
It shows your last login time, so it might be for you to check if someone else might have logged into your account in between your last session and your current one.
On June 06 2011 04:09 euroboy wrote: This popped up in my mind yesterday.
Do anyone have an explanation for the login procedure? You know when you type your password and login, you are face with a "Enter" screen with your profile in it. Why is this? Has Blizzard something planned for this screen? How does it look on the SEA server where you can play on both SEA and NA? Or is it just a remnant from the Guest login screen?
It shows your last login time, so it might be for you to check if someone else might have logged into your account in between your last session and your current one.
To answer the SEA part of the question - SEA accounts get a little button before they log in called "Region" where they select which region they want to play on.
The login procedure works the same exact way for us. We just need to go to the 'region' menu if we want to log in to the opposite server we were on last login.
Hi, I want to participate in the tournament Husky and Day9 are arranging, but I need a North American copy of SC2. Could a kind American look into where I can get it the cheapest? My idea was to order it to a friend in America and then he could give me the serial key.
My apologies if there's a megapost about this somewhere, I couldn't seem to find it.
On June 06 2011 21:51 Rambowjo wrote: Hi, I want to participate in the tournament Husky and Day9 are arranging, but I need a North American copy of SC2. Could a kind American look into where I can get it the cheapest? My idea was to order it to a friend in America and then he could give me the serial key.
My apologies if there's a megapost about this somewhere, I couldn't seem to find it.
You can get a copy via amazon for 35$ but the shipping will be exspensive http://www.teamliquid.net/store It's probably best to buy it on a gamekey site
On June 06 2011 21:51 Rambowjo wrote: Hi, I want to participate in the tournament Husky and Day9 are arranging, but I need a North American copy of SC2. Could a kind American look into where I can get it the cheapest? My idea was to order it to a friend in America and then he could give me the serial key.
My apologies if there's a megapost about this somewhere, I couldn't seem to find it.
You can get a copy via amazon for 35$ but the shipping will be exspensive http://www.teamliquid.net/store It's probably best to buy it on a gamekey site
Well as I said, I will just order it to a friend in Texas, so maybe the shipping won't be that expensive. Thanks by the way
I just had the idea of tech labs and reactors being able to be built on either side of the barracks/factory/starport. This would eliminate the possional imbalance that, for example, made jinro lose his reactor in the GSL. What do you guys think?
Two days ago I played a game against the feared player 2, aiming to see if I can still play as well as I used to, as I have had a break from Starcraft 2. As i play protoss, i thought it'd be really clever to first quickly select my Nexus before sending my probes to mine. I started my first probe milliseconds into the game and sent my probes to mine by double clicking them within the first 2 seconds of the game. Now, when it came to the build order times, I found that the build time for my first probe was 51:26. Another example of this was in another game where I managed to get 55.28. This happened on versus AI and also online in ladder matches. Is this a bug, or is it really showing the time of the probe in milliseconds?
Could someone please tell me where the memes "(playername) FIGHTING!!" and "(playername) HWAITING!!" come from? I assume it's from some Korean commentators since then it would probably sound funny to a native English speaker.
On June 07 2011 02:18 GoodLuckHF wrote: I just had the idea of tech labs and reactors being able to be built on either side of the barracks/factory/starport. This would eliminate the possional imbalance that, for example, made jinro lose his reactor in the GSL. What do you guys think?
How is a bad decision by Jinro equivalent to "positional imbalance"? He took a risk by leaving his add-on on the outside of his wall and paid for it.
On June 07 2011 02:18 GoodLuckHF wrote: I just had the idea of tech labs and reactors being able to be built on either side of the barracks/factory/starport. This would eliminate the possional imbalance that, for example, made jinro lose his reactor in the GSL. What do you guys think?
How is a bad decision by Jinro equivalent to "positional imbalance"? He took a risk by leaving his add-on on the outside of his wall and paid for it.
because in a different spawn location, the add-on would be on the inside of the wall, not the outside.
On June 07 2011 02:18 GoodLuckHF wrote: I just had the idea of tech labs and reactors being able to be built on either side of the barracks/factory/starport. This would eliminate the possional imbalance that, for example, made jinro lose his reactor in the GSL. What do you guys think?
How is a bad decision by Jinro equivalent to "positional imbalance"? He took a risk by leaving his add-on on the outside of his wall and paid for it.
because in a different spawn location, the add-on would be on the inside of the wall, not the outside.
And he should have prepared his build to account for that possibility. This isn't exactly an issue plaguing high-level competition.
On June 06 2011 13:23 RM_12 wrote: Why aren't top Protoss players using Phenix's PvT?
I recently played PvT when i was behind after his fast expo but i was able to keep colosus alive forever because of phenix in my unit mix, and he couldn't win any engagement, eventually loosing while 1 base up over me ^^. You usually go zealot-sentry-stalker-colosus and tech to templar but if you add 1 stargate and keep making phenix you suddenly win every engagement.
You can kill vikings without suiciding your stalkers to marauder ball, and kill medivacs. Also phenixes attacking vikings allow you to move forward with colossus to deal demage and not die in few viking shots. It's much easier to micro, and terran can't go marines (you have ever growing colossus count) and if they don't transition out of marauder ball you have the ability to add VR's and roflstomp Terran even harder.
Srsly they are not expensive and you don't even need to micro them, just a move and control ground battle with FF while your Phenixes just kill anything above the ground.
So i wonder, what is the biggest weakness of incorporating phenixes into standard chargelot-sentry-stalker-colosus that pro's don't use it?
This is your erroneous assumption, and one of the main reasons players don't incorporate phoenixes into their late-game armies.
The point is to add it in mid game, because they are great in late game composition (200/200) and they allow you to retain your colossus much much easier.
if the terran reacts well enough with 2 starport reactors then all they have to do is take out the colossus quickly before the vikings go down, emp the pheonixes, then they become useless
so basically they'll have marauders left over vs. your phoenixes with no energy
You don;t need energy on phenixes, you have them to only kill vikings and medivacs while making your other units survive ALOT longer (unless you are against tanks, then you need to dodge emp's which with phenix speed is easier than with any other unit)
On June 06 2011 13:23 RM_12 wrote: Why aren't top Protoss players using Phenix's PvT?
I recently played PvT when i was behind after his fast expo but i was able to keep colosus alive forever because of phenix in my unit mix, and he couldn't win any engagement, eventually loosing while 1 base up over me ^^. You usually go zealot-sentry-stalker-colosus and tech to templar but if you add 1 stargate and keep making phenix you suddenly win every engagement.
You can kill vikings without suiciding your stalkers to marauder ball, and kill medivacs. Also phenixes attacking vikings allow you to move forward with colossus to deal demage and not die in few viking shots. It's much easier to micro, and terran can't go marines (you have ever growing colossus count) and if they don't transition out of marauder ball you have the ability to add VR's and roflstomp Terran even harder.
Srsly they are not expensive and you don't even need to micro them, just a move and control ground battle with FF while your Phenixes just kill anything above the ground.
So i wonder, what is the biggest weakness of incorporating phenixes into standard chargelot-sentry-stalker-colosus that pro's don't use it?
This is your erroneous assumption, and one of the main reasons players don't incorporate phoenixes into their late-game armies.
The point is to add it in mid game, because they are great in late game composition (200/200) and they allow you to retain your colossus much much easier.
if the terran reacts well enough with 2 starport reactors then all they have to do is take out the colossus quickly before the vikings go down, emp the pheonixes, then they become useless
so basically they'll have marauders left over vs. your phoenixes with no energy
You don;t need energy on phenixes, you have them to only kill vikings and medivacs while making your other units survive ALOT longer (unless you are against tanks, then you need to dodge emp's which with phenix speed is easier than with any other unit)
What happens if the terran does a timing attack with pure bio in the midgame or goes pure bio + ghost in the late game? You won't have the gateway units or the colossi count to deal with it since all your gas will be eaten up in your phoenixes. Phoenix-Colossus compositions work best on maps where you can turtle in your natural and third (e.g. Terminus, Tal'Darim Altar, Scrap Station, etc.) and in situations where you force vikings (colossi before stargate, which is the opposite of your plan).
The issues are how to incorporate phoenixes into your overall gameplan and setting up your opponent to make that viking-heavy army.
On June 06 2011 13:23 RM_12 wrote: Why aren't top Protoss players using Phenix's PvT?
I recently played PvT when i was behind after his fast expo but i was able to keep colosus alive forever because of phenix in my unit mix, and he couldn't win any engagement, eventually loosing while 1 base up over me ^^. You usually go zealot-sentry-stalker-colosus and tech to templar but if you add 1 stargate and keep making phenix you suddenly win every engagement.
You can kill vikings without suiciding your stalkers to marauder ball, and kill medivacs. Also phenixes attacking vikings allow you to move forward with colossus to deal demage and not die in few viking shots. It's much easier to micro, and terran can't go marines (you have ever growing colossus count) and if they don't transition out of marauder ball you have the ability to add VR's and roflstomp Terran even harder.
Srsly they are not expensive and you don't even need to micro them, just a move and control ground battle with FF while your Phenixes just kill anything above the ground.
So i wonder, what is the biggest weakness of incorporating phenixes into standard chargelot-sentry-stalker-colosus that pro's don't use it?
This is your erroneous assumption, and one of the main reasons players don't incorporate phoenixes into their late-game armies.
The point is to add it in mid game, because they are great in late game composition (200/200) and they allow you to retain your colossus much much easier.
if the terran reacts well enough with 2 starport reactors then all they have to do is take out the colossus quickly before the vikings go down, emp the pheonixes, then they become useless
so basically they'll have marauders left over vs. your phoenixes with no energy
You don;t need energy on phenixes, you have them to only kill vikings and medivacs while making your other units survive ALOT longer (unless you are against tanks, then you need to dodge emp's which with phenix speed is easier than with any other unit)
What happens if the terran does a timing attack with pure bio in the midgame or goes pure bio + ghost in the late game? You won't have the gateway units or the colossi count to deal with it since all your gas will be eaten up in your phoenixes. Phoenix-Colossus compositions work best on maps where you can turtle in your natural and third (e.g. Terminus, Tal'Darim Altar, Scrap Station, etc.) and in situations where you force vikings (colossi before stargate, which is the opposite of your plan).
The issues are how to incorporate phoenixes into your overall gameplan and setting up your opponent to make that viking-heavy army.
(colossi before stargate, which is the opposite of your plan
You misunderstood.
If you see no starport with observer, you won't add stargate. I'm talking about adding phenixes when you already have few colossi. They have short producton time and are not expensive for how usefull they become. If you open with robo and start colossus production relatively early, terran have to go for some timing or add vikings. If he goes for timing, you have units countering his units, if he adds starports and goes for late game you add stargate and gain upper hand in engagements, because it works out extremly well. I encourage everyone to try it and see how you can move forward with entire army without exposing your colossus nor stalkers.
When terran dodges colossi with marauder ball and moves vikings forward you have to move colossi back and get stalkers in range of vikings to snipe them leaving your stalkers in range of marauders while they are out of colossi range. When you add phenixes you can suddenly a-move and still beat this terran composition. It made HUGE difference for me in this MU, that's why i'm suprised it's not commonly used.
It seems to me that you're getting a little of everything and you'll be stretched too thin on sentries or stalkers. Too few of either and terran can just ignore your phoenix and rush forward, snipe the collo and then you'll be in quite a bit of trouble.
On June 07 2011 09:14 Probe1 wrote: It seems to me that you're getting a little of everything and you'll be stretched too thin on sentries or stalkers. Too few of either and terran can just ignore your phoenix and rush forward, snipe the collo and then you'll be in quite a bit of trouble.
You will have less stalkers, and phenixes do theid job in this composition, except they don't evaporate to marauders. Just try it bro
Does anyone feel that Protoss seems quite weak since the last patch?
I know our lategame compositions should still be as strong as ever, but it feels as if with the warpgate research nerf that our warpgate timing attacks are weaker and hence not so scary, that Terrans and Zergs can afford to be much greedier and always end up ahead significantly or else if we try to be greedy, due to delayed warpgate, it is too easy for them to punish and we end up behind or dead anyway.
It could just be what I am feeling because I haven't been able to play so much and am in a bit of a slump, but it seems like I have been seeing similar things in tournaments. Such as the super tournament, there is only one protoss in the round of 16.
On June 06 2011 19:40 bull0563 wrote: Is this month marking the start of the inevitable korean dominance in sc2?
Wait for Dreamhack. I think we'll really get to see there.
So far we've had Korea Vs World where I believe the world team performed very well. Now we've had Koreans at MLG where for the most part they dominated, but those weren't the best players the "world/foreigners" have to offer. At Dreamhack there will be different players compared to MLG, if the Koreans still dominate, they are in fact better, but we'll just have to wait and see.
Now for some biased stuff: White Ra beast from the east Korean eater.
On June 05 2011 23:13 Spartangy wrote: Do you guys know why some pro Zerg players recently, when just beginning the game, build up about 100 minerals instead of producing drones, and then produce drones? It's odd, I believe Tastosis (or was it Day9 and DjWheat?) pointed it out at MLG when IdrA and/or Losira did it, but I don't understand it. Anyone know what was up with that?
I think it has to do with larvae production after the first overlord, having the larvae come out more evenly instead of doing the extractor trick and instantly making 2 drones after the overlord pops, but I'm not sure, doesn't quite make sense.
I would like to know the answer to this too, anyone know?
Did anyone catch the Maka vs SC games? I had a feeling Maka cut SCV production in the openings for both games (maybe to get a faster orbital?). What were the reasons for it?
On June 07 2011 09:14 Probe1 wrote: It seems to me that you're getting a little of everything and you'll be stretched too thin on sentries or stalkers. Too few of either and terran can just ignore your phoenix and rush forward, snipe the collo and then you'll be in quite a bit of trouble.
You will have less stalkers, and phenixes do theid job in this composition, except they don't evaporate to marauders. Just try it bro
150/100 is hardly cheap. If you're going for Colossus and Phoenix, you'll have little to no Stalkers, Sentries, or upgrades for your army.
Stalkers and Phoenixes do almost the exact same DPS to a Viking, except Stalkers only cost 125/50 and actually has lasting relevance against the rest of his army.
Phoenixes don't kill Vikings even close to fast enough to protect your Colossus unless you make a huge number of them, but that means your army is essentially Zealot/Phoenix/Colossus then. All Terran needs to do is kite your Zealots until they're all dead then rush forward and kill your Colossus. If you have no Gateway support, even Marines beat any number of Colossus cost effectively.
If your entire reason for getting Phoenix is that it's "easier to A-move your army now!" well, the Protoss army is already 1A mode as long as you keep your Zealots in front.
On June 07 2011 09:14 Probe1 wrote: It seems to me that you're getting a little of everything and you'll be stretched too thin on sentries or stalkers. Too few of either and terran can just ignore your phoenix and rush forward, snipe the collo and then you'll be in quite a bit of trouble.
You will have less stalkers, and phenixes do theid job in this composition, except they don't evaporate to marauders. Just try it bro
150/100 is hardly cheap. If you're going for Colossus and Phoenix, you'll have little to no Stalkers, Sentries, or upgrades for your army.
Stalkers and Phoenixes do almost the exact same DPS to a Viking, except Stalkers only cost 125/50 and actually has lasting relevance against the rest of his army.
Phoenixes don't kill Vikings even close to fast enough to protect your Colossus unless you make a huge number of them, but that means your army is essentially Zealot/Phoenix/Colossus then. All Terran needs to do is kite your Zealots until they're all dead then rush forward and kill your Colossus. If you have no Gateway support, even Marines beat any number of Colossus cost effectively.
If your entire reason for getting Phoenix is that it's "easier to A-move your army now!" well, the Protoss army is already 1A mode as long as you keep your Zealots in front.
Wow, man are you even playing protoss? I'm ading phenixes to standard colossus composition and they do much much better job as anti air, than pure stalkers because they aren't hit by marauders. Terran doing basic micro with his bio ball and vikings have huge advantage over you if you rely on stalkers to deal with vikings, and you don't have to be Thorzain to execute it. Not to mention, bio ball witiout medivacs (phenix anyone?) is a joke and much easier to deal with.
Phoenixes don't kill Vikings even close to fast enough to protect your Colossus unless you make a huge number of them, but that means your army is essentially Zealot/Phoenix/Colossus
You are talking out of your ass. Please use a strategy before you are trying to say anything about it, because you are far from describing the actual state of it.
I was thinking as I was reading the morrow interview, and as a Protoss player I feel that the Roach needs an upgrade at the hatchery level to, every 10 seconds or so, have its range increased to 5 or 6... This would make it more effective against sentry and also allow it to put some pressure in the early game. Stupid idea?
On June 07 2011 09:14 Probe1 wrote: It seems to me that you're getting a little of everything and you'll be stretched too thin on sentries or stalkers. Too few of either and terran can just ignore your phoenix and rush forward, snipe the collo and then you'll be in quite a bit of trouble.
You will have less stalkers, and phenixes do theid job in this composition, except they don't evaporate to marauders. Just try it bro
150/100 is hardly cheap. If you're going for Colossus and Phoenix, you'll have little to no Stalkers, Sentries, or upgrades for your army.
Stalkers and Phoenixes do almost the exact same DPS to a Viking, except Stalkers only cost 125/50 and actually has lasting relevance against the rest of his army.
Phoenixes don't kill Vikings even close to fast enough to protect your Colossus unless you make a huge number of them, but that means your army is essentially Zealot/Phoenix/Colossus then. All Terran needs to do is kite your Zealots until they're all dead then rush forward and kill your Colossus. If you have no Gateway support, even Marines beat any number of Colossus cost effectively.
If your entire reason for getting Phoenix is that it's "easier to A-move your army now!" well, the Protoss army is already 1A mode as long as you keep your Zealots in front.
Hi Curu What's up. Hey do you have a link to your profile? I'm just trying to vet the information you are spewing here; none of it seems correct whatsoever.
The main purpose of getting pheonixes rather than stalkers has nothing to do with which unit does more damage to vikings. The main purpose of having pheonixes in with your army is to distract the vikings.
Without any air units whatsoever, the vikings can only hit one unit: The collossus. It's a time-based pressure cooker when, as a terran, you are fighting a Protoss army with Collossus. It doesn't matter that you can kill their collosus. It matters how fast. With a handful of pheonixes an a protoss deathball, what happens is that, specifically, during an "a-move attack" (as you so put it), the phoenixes and the vikings actually go at it!
What happens, is that the phoenixes die to the vikings after a short time. However, none of your collosus get touched. So even if the terran is winning the ground game (you have less stalkers, zealots, sentries overall), your collosus always make it to the end of the battle, and wipe out everything with the exception of the vikings.
You said : "Pheonixes don't kill Vikings fast enough to protect your Collosus". Hey dude, listen, please link your account. If you are actually trying to WIN THE AIR WAR with the amount of pheonixes you are building, then you are some sort of a silver league player. In that case, you should be listening and not speaking in any scenario in which you are discussing strategy.
On June 06 2011 13:23 RM_12 wrote: Why aren't top Protoss players using Phenix's PvT?
I recently played PvT when i was behind after his fast expo but i was able to keep colosus alive forever because of phenix in my unit mix, and he couldn't win any engagement, eventually loosing while 1 base up over me ^^. You usually go zealot-sentry-stalker-colosus and tech to templar but if you add 1 stargate and keep making phenix you suddenly win every engagement.
You can kill vikings without suiciding your stalkers to marauder ball, and kill medivacs. Also phenixes attacking vikings allow you to move forward with colossus to deal demage and not die in few viking shots. It's much easier to micro, and terran can't go marines (you have ever growing colossus count) and if they don't transition out of marauder ball you have the ability to add VR's and roflstomp Terran even harder.
Srsly they are not expensive and you don't even need to micro them, just a move and control ground battle with FF while your Phenixes just kill anything above the ground.
So i wonder, what is the biggest weakness of incorporating phenixes into standard chargelot-sentry-stalker-colosus that pro's don't use it?
This is your erroneous assumption, and one of the main reasons players don't incorporate phoenixes into their late-game armies.
The point is to add it in mid game, because they are great in late game composition (200/200) and they allow you to retain your colossus much much easier.
if the terran reacts well enough with 2 starport reactors then all they have to do is take out the colossus quickly before the vikings go down, emp the pheonixes, then they become useless
so basically they'll have marauders left over vs. your phoenixes with no energy
You don;t need energy on phenixes, you have them to only kill vikings and medivacs while making your other units survive ALOT longer (unless you are against tanks, then you need to dodge emp's which with phenix speed is easier than with any other unit)
What happens if the terran does a timing attack with pure bio in the midgame or goes pure bio + ghost in the late game? You won't have the gateway units or the colossi count to deal with it since all your gas will be eaten up in your phoenixes. Phoenix-Colossus compositions work best on maps where you can turtle in your natural and third (e.g. Terminus, Tal'Darim Altar, Scrap Station, etc.) and in situations where you force vikings (colossi before stargate, which is the opposite of your plan).
The issues are how to incorporate phoenixes into your overall gameplan and setting up your opponent to make that viking-heavy army.
(colossi before stargate, which is the opposite of your plan
You misunderstood.
If you see no starport with observer, you won't add stargate. I'm talking about adding phenixes when you already have few colossi. They have short producton time and are not expensive for how usefull they become. If you open with robo and start colossus production relatively early, terran have to go for some timing or add vikings. If he goes for timing, you have units countering his units, if he adds starports and goes for late game you add stargate and gain upper hand in engagements, because it works out extremly well. I encourage everyone to try it and see how you can move forward with entire army without exposing your colossus nor stalkers.
When terran dodges colossi with marauder ball and moves vikings forward you have to move colossi back and get stalkers in range of vikings to snipe them leaving your stalkers in range of marauders while they are out of colossi range. When you add phenixes you can suddenly a-move and still beat this terran composition. It made HUGE difference for me in this MU, that's why i'm suprised it's not commonly used.
It doesn't work like that dude. :/
If you go for fast colossus and he goes for a timing at that point, you won't have "units countering his units". You'll have close to nothing countering his units since the tech will not kick in while you're fighting. Going fast Robo + Bay is a big gas investment that doesn't pay off until the first 2-3 colossi get onto the field. Until then you've sacrificed stalkers and sentries to get the colossi out and are vulnerable to a timing push. Similarly you'll be vulnerable when you switch over to phoenix production as you'll be skimping stalker and sentry production as well. Phoenixes are great against the typical Viking response, but it will lose you the game if you make too many of them. Terran can simply bio-ball you to death after the first big battle. Haven't you wondered why roach-hydra-corruptor is no longer popular?
Plus you have to consider how this fits into macro-management. You cannot support these transitions off of 2 bases. Do you take an early third? Do you feign weakness to make your opponent expand, giving you the time to expand yourself? Are you making a big army geared towards one decisive victory? Would you consider going early stargate to harass, then transitioning into colossi? What maps allow you to do this safely? What maps leave you vulnerable to attack at your weakest moments? How will you deal with these inevitable attacks and minimize your losses? All you're talking about is a unit composition, which definitely works. But you're not accounting for everything before and after it.
On June 05 2011 23:13 Spartangy wrote: Do you guys know why some pro Zerg players recently, when just beginning the game, build up about 100 minerals instead of producing drones, and then produce drones? It's odd, I believe Tastosis (or was it Day9 and DjWheat?) pointed it out at MLG when IdrA and/or Losira did it, but I don't understand it. Anyone know what was up with that?
I think it has to do with larvae production after the first overlord, having the larvae come out more evenly instead of doing the extractor trick and instantly making 2 drones after the overlord pops, but I'm not sure, doesn't quite make sense.
I would like to know the answer to this too, anyone know?
There was a huge discussion in beta about what kind of opening was the most economical, there are basically 3 ways to deal with it:
- Build overlord at 10 and wait for 150 mins then produce 3 drones when the overlord pops. - Build overlord at 10, make an extractor putting you at 9/10, make a drone and cancel the extractor (thus named extractor trick) putting you at 11/10 for a short time, and then making the 2 drones when the overlord pops. - Build overlord at 9, make a drone, and then 2 drones when overlord pops.
The difference between these options is very minimal, 4 minerals at 3 mins mark or something.
The 3rd option is done the most on EU/US server, where the KR server prefers the 2nd option it seems. Some people (like me) don't like the uneven minerals when you do the extractor trick, so I always go 9overlord.
Can you guys spread the word so blizzard fix this when ZEALOTS are EMPED they still have CHARGE but when I EMP STAKERS with blink they CANT blink but ZEALOTS have CHARGE still??~!?!? ANYONE agree with me?
Do you guys know why some pro Zerg players recently, when just beginning the game, build up about 100 minerals instead of producing drones, and then produce drones? It's odd, I believe Tastosis (or was it Day9 and DjWheat?) pointed it out at MLG when IdrA and/or Losira did it, but I don't understand it. Anyone know what was up with that?
I think it has to do with larvae production after the first overlord, having the larvae come out more evenly instead of doing the extractor trick and instantly making 2 drones after the overlord pops, but I'm not sure, doesn't quite make sense.
I would like to know the answer to this too, anyone know?
Exactly what Cajun2001 said. A lot of people, myself included, prefer to make an OL on 9, drone to 10 and then two drones when the overlord pops. You never reach 3 larva (and lose larva birthing time) and you don't have uneven minerals. Its a non starter discussion (again Cajun already explained) because the difference is less than 5 minerals.
I am curious about the potentials of pushing with 3 or 4 immortals around with a couple of with zealots and 3 or 4 sentries off of two gateways, Immortals are stupidly strong against roaches, and with zealots any hydralisks out by that time need to micro away from the zealots while taking shots from the immortals. I am only gold league so any testing I do is tainted by my bad macro and mechanics. I would just like to have your opinions on this possibility.
On June 08 2011 14:26 cekkmt wrote: I am curious about the potentials of pushing with 3 or 4 immortals around with a couple of with zealots and 3 or 4 sentries off of two gateways, Immortals are stupidly strong against roaches, and with zealots any hydralisks out by that time need to micro away from the zealots while taking shots from the immortals. I am only gold league so any testing I do is tainted by my bad macro and mechanics. I would just like to have your opinions on this possibility.
To build 3 or even 4 Immortals you are already dead by that time cuz their build time is simply to high even with Chronoboosts. You have no valid Tech at that time when Roach/Hydra hits the field and your Sentrys and Zealots wouldn't hold a big fight long enough to make your Immortals worth the money. Adding a Robotics Bay and building a Colossi is simply the better option during that time.
My opponents are only diamond but I assure you it would be suicide. Very high cost, their range necessitates them to be towards the front, and Zerg is pushing with a high dps army. If you FF'd with divine intervention and no less this would be viable, however I feel that builds shouldn't be based on a perfect game but their strength tolerates the most amount of mistakes while still being strong enough to win.
On June 05 2011 21:15 Bleak wrote: Does anyone know why Irradiate was removed? I think if Ravens still had that, they would see use. I just don't understand the decision for it. Is it because of the clumping effect being stronger in SC2?
I'd assume so yeah seeing how powerful irradiate vs mutas was - ofc it wouldn't be THAT powerful vs say marines etc. but I can understand why they didn't want it in.
I think it's more of the fact that the average player would have whined ceaselessly about how OP it is, because they wouldn't be able to handle the idea of splitting their mutalisks. I'm pretty sure that's why the reaver isn't there either. In two seconds, your entire mineral line can disappear, and I'd imagine that they didn't want the average player to have to deal with that.
I highly doubt that's why the Reaver got removed seeing as Banelings and blueflame Hellions are in the game. And with Hellions it's so bad you can't even run away your workers towards your army becasue of Hellions' splashdamage in that congaline and the hellions being faster.
Anyways, it's hard to say why some stuff got removed in the game and something added. To me it looks like they just wanted to make sure it wasn't SC1 with updated graphics and engine, so they removed alot of units and spells and added new ones.
That's what it looks like to me anyway.
Basically, they added in as many units as they could that were "really cool and epic" and had no idea how gameplay mechanics would work out. The chief idiot even admitted "making SC2 was such a learning experience for me. There's this thing called game mechanics, and I wanted epic units, and people were telling me, no, mechanics are more important.".
So the game units are pretty epic, seriously, if you think about each of them individually. Banshees from Avatar, Ghosts, Dark Templar, etc.
But the fucking mechanics. suck. I would give anything to see a zealot mine field charge, or vulture harass. Good God....
Shiv I'd check the IdrA fanclub or just search for Idra MLG interview. I know I saw the original video posted in the fanclub a few times.
On June 08 2011 09:43 zayuh206 wrote: Can you guys spread the word so blizzard fix this when ZEALOTS are EMPED they still have CHARGE but when I EMP STAKERS with blink they CANT blink but ZEALOTS have CHARGE still??~!?!? ANYONE agree with me?
As soon as they give Zerg seperate UI buttons for burrow and unburrow so you'll never again unknowingly have a random burrowed roach chillin in your base talking to the sediment.
On June 06 2011 13:23 RM_12 wrote: Why aren't top Protoss players using Phenix's PvT?
I recently played PvT when i was behind after his fast expo but i was able to keep colosus alive forever because of phenix in my unit mix, and he couldn't win any engagement, eventually loosing while 1 base up over me ^^. You usually go zealot-sentry-stalker-colosus and tech to templar but if you add 1 stargate and keep making phenix you suddenly win every engagement.
You can kill vikings without suiciding your stalkers to marauder ball, and kill medivacs. Also phenixes attacking vikings allow you to move forward with colossus to deal demage and not die in few viking shots. It's much easier to micro, and terran can't go marines (you have ever growing colossus count) and if they don't transition out of marauder ball you have the ability to add VR's and roflstomp Terran even harder.
Srsly they are not expensive and you don't even need to micro them, just a move and control ground battle with FF while your Phenixes just kill anything above the ground.
So i wonder, what is the biggest weakness of incorporating phenixes into standard chargelot-sentry-stalker-colosus that pro's don't use it?
This is your erroneous assumption, and one of the main reasons players don't incorporate phoenixes into their late-game armies.
The point is to add it in mid game, because they are great in late game composition (200/200) and they allow you to retain your colossus much much easier.
if the terran reacts well enough with 2 starport reactors then all they have to do is take out the colossus quickly before the vikings go down, emp the pheonixes, then they become useless
so basically they'll have marauders left over vs. your phoenixes with no energy
You don;t need energy on phenixes, you have them to only kill vikings and medivacs while making your other units survive ALOT longer (unless you are against tanks, then you need to dodge emp's which with phenix speed is easier than with any other unit)
What happens if the terran does a timing attack with pure bio in the midgame or goes pure bio + ghost in the late game? You won't have the gateway units or the colossi count to deal with it since all your gas will be eaten up in your phoenixes. Phoenix-Colossus compositions work best on maps where you can turtle in your natural and third (e.g. Terminus, Tal'Darim Altar, Scrap Station, etc.) and in situations where you force vikings (colossi before stargate, which is the opposite of your plan).
The issues are how to incorporate phoenixes into your overall gameplan and setting up your opponent to make that viking-heavy army.
(colossi before stargate, which is the opposite of your plan
You misunderstood.
If you see no starport with observer, you won't add stargate. I'm talking about adding phenixes when you already have few colossi. They have short producton time and are not expensive for how usefull they become. If you open with robo and start colossus production relatively early, terran have to go for some timing or add vikings. If he goes for timing, you have units countering his units, if he adds starports and goes for late game you add stargate and gain upper hand in engagements, because it works out extremly well. I encourage everyone to try it and see how you can move forward with entire army without exposing your colossus nor stalkers.
When terran dodges colossi with marauder ball and moves vikings forward you have to move colossi back and get stalkers in range of vikings to snipe them leaving your stalkers in range of marauders while they are out of colossi range. When you add phenixes you can suddenly a-move and still beat this terran composition. It made HUGE difference for me in this MU, that's why i'm suprised it's not commonly used.
It doesn't work like that dude. :/
It's hard to believe you when my experience confirms it works exactly like that in every game i executed it properly.
If you go for fast colossus and he goes for a timing at that point, you won't have "units countering his units". You'll have close to nothing countering his units since the tech will not kick in while you're fighting. Going fast Robo + Bay is a big gas investment that doesn't pay off until the first 2-3 colossi get onto the field. Until then you've sacrificed stalkers and sentries to get the colossi out and are vulnerable to a timing push.
Firs of all, this has nothing to do with phenixes. Secondly, this is why you scout. You see 1 base timing - you get more units and delay your tech, i'm not going to talk about aspects that are obvious and irrelevant for the discussion.
Similarly you'll be vulnerable when you switch over to phoenix production as you'll be skimping stalker and sentry production as well
adding one stargate is not a big investment and you do it when you already have colossi on the field and 2+ fully saturated bases.
Phoenixes are great against the typical Viking response, but it will lose you the game if you make too many of them.
That's why you don't make too many of them? Why would you say that strategy is bad because you can do it wrong? The point of any strategy is to do it correctly, lol.
Terran can simply bio-ball you to death after the first big battle.
Have you forgot the part when you get colossus before adding phenixes?
Plus you have to consider how this fits into macro-management.
It fits very well, due to balanced mineral/gas cost in relation to rest of your army and short production time of phenixes.
You cannot support these transitions off of 2 bases. Do you take an early third? Do you feign weakness to make your opponent expand, giving you the time to expand yourself? Are you making a big army geared towards one decisive victory?
You can be behind in bases and sit longer on your 2nd because you will have great colossus retention unless you missmicro badly. And you will gradually overcome terran army untill he transitions to fucking mech, or dies.
Would you consider going early stargate to harass, then transitioning into colossi?
Do you know how many phenixes it takes to kill one marauder in 1 lift? Wouldn't go stargate before colossi.
What maps allow you to do this safely?
Any map that you feel comfortable with gateway/colossi play.
What maps leave you vulnerable to attack at your weakest moments?
In close positions on meta and similar, you have to get more gateways and play safe, because of terran timings being strongest there, so you'll do it after taking third if he isn't already dead to usual +2 timing with colossi.
How will you deal with these inevitable attacks and minimize your losses?
Before phenixes you rely on FF's and stay defensive (It's ok if he takes faster third than you, and i believe this is pretty much the only time that's not terrible for Protoss)
But you're not accounting for everything before and after it.
I do, i just didn't explain what i thought was obvious, because before adding 1 stargate you are doing standard build.
I have about 20 or perhaps even more off days this summer, so I've been thinking to practice hard. I'm a platinum Terran wanting to get to Masters. What should I focus on while practicing (instead of playing a lot) to achieve this goal?
Does anyone know where I can see financial statements from MLG? I have seen a lot of disagreement about their revenues in various threads and would like to see some data for myself.
On June 06 2011 11:00 Vansetsu wrote: So... I have kind of felt this way since the roach got +1 (4) range buff. Zerg played correctly at the highest mechanical and strategical level is very strong. In particular against a Protoss. Discluding early to maybe mid game, I feel like even the best Zerg can generate too much income and and can either re-macro strong unit compositions too fast or stockpile and do other things.
I tried to think of a solution for this for a long time, and finally I think I may have come up with a feasible concept - Charging resources for every creep tumor put on the map (initial tumor possibley being free), and maybe charging a slow mineral rate, ala an scv repairing something, for overlords dropping creep. I have no idea what the amounts charged would be, maybe something like 25m?
Creep is free vision, free expansion denial, and free speed advantage. I think forcing the Zerg to passively spend a little of the massive amount of excess minerals they can macro up in SC2 and making creep something of "resource based value" to attack would maybe make the PvZ match up a tad bit more balanced (before the roach range increase, stalkers could harass roaches without speed and kite with good micro ect.) It also makes a stockpiled zerg a little more accountable for how he chooses to engage with units, even if they are in a "throw away army". However, I'm not sure how this would adversely effect TvZ, as creep is often quickly and easily destroyed... but it's something I have been thinking about a lot.
I'd love to hear some intelligent, non bias feedback on the idea. (if that's possible )
Really, the bias in your post kind of makes it hard to come from an unbiased point of view. You state that you believe zerg macro to be too strong; This may or may not be true and is the basis for your suggested nerf. As a zerg player I would love it if creep was removed from the game and some units like the queen and the hydralisk were buffed/changed to compensate.
Btw, you have a unit that is invisible and can see creep tumors. Use it.
On June 06 2011 21:51 Rambowjo wrote: Hi, I want to participate in the tournament Husky and Day9 are arranging, but I need a North American copy of SC2. Could a kind American look into where I can get it the cheapest? My idea was to order it to a friend in America and then he could give me the serial key.
My apologies if there's a megapost about this somewhere, I couldn't seem to find it.
Major stores like target and best buy or gamestop would be sufficient. The game costs $60 (or did) and is available at most tech stores. If you have a friend in the states, then it shouldn't be a problem to get a copy.
New new toss here looking for a tutor, hoping to make Diamond by the end of summer (In bronze on the threshold MMR wise into silver atm) Can offer payment but, add pm me here and we will discuss please. was told this is an amazing community and would love help
Hey guys, quick question, dunno where else to post it If I change my name to grack would that be bad/frowned upon/ anything like that It's been in the pipeline for a while, not just since the thing with MMA. I want to change it to grack because my friends call me grack because I'm prone to rage and quitting games early Just don't wanna look like i'm trying to be Idra or anything like that
On June 09 2011 03:45 Annoying Orange wrote: Hey guys, quick question, dunno where else to post it If I change my name to grack would that be bad/frowned upon/ anything like that It's been in the pipeline for a while, not just since the thing with MMA. I want to change it to grack because my friends call me grack because I'm prone to rage and quitting games early Just don't wanna look like i'm trying to be Idra or anything like that
Nobody would care on ladder.
EGIdrA clone would be bad, but using a nickname like that isn't as everyone knows you are not the real one.
Hello, i got a question for you all. I recently realised that protoss does onyl need to built their gateway tech structures without haveing them powered in order to be able to warp in the teched units.(Didnt try with further tech than Gateway) Wasnt this differently in the past, or did I get this wrong all the time? :D
Example: Cyber core is built. Powering Pylon gets destroyed. Toss still able to warp in Stalkers.
On June 09 2011 04:13 Plum13um wrote: Hello, i got a question for you all. I recently realised that protoss does onyl need to built their gateway tech structures without haveing them powered in order to be able to warp in the teched units.(Didnt try with further tech than Gateway) Wasnt this differently in the past, or did I get this wrong all the time? :D
Example: Cyber core is built. Powering Pylon gets destroyed. Toss still able to warp in Stalkers.
**Toss OP!** =D
When your barracks are floating you can build factory, when your hydra den is no longer on creep, you can build hydras untill it dies, etc. You are not using cyber core to warp stalkers, you are using gateways.
It's actually amazing how SC2 is developing, also gameplaywise. Look at the recent tournament games, I'm really happy we get so see awesome games now - just compare them to games played months ago, which were much shorter and generally lost after one engagement. I know it was to be forseen, but guys, it's happening! :D
I think it's amazing too, but I've yet to see much of anything that has blown me away. There are exceptions of course, but most of these games are just showcases of efficient macro and decent microing (pulling back units).
I have about 20 or perhaps even more off days this summer, so I've been thinking to practice hard. I'm a platinum Terran wanting to get to Masters. What should I focus on while practicing (instead of playing a lot) to achieve this goal?
What got me over the hump from Plat to Diamond, and then to Master League level* (*I'm Diamond rank 1, but every match I play is vs ML so it's just a matter of time), was learning Timing Attacks.
I mean this both as an aggressor and as a defender. First, for the aggressor side I'll give some examples:
TvZ: If the Zerg 14 hatches, they *usually* have a weak spot anytime before 7 or 7:30 when their fast expo hasn't yet paid for itself. If you hit there with a solid force (hint: expand as you push) then you will likely either A) win right then, at least against plats or B) force the Zerg to not be able to drone hard.
TvP: If Toss does any sort of expo (except a 15 nexus), then you have a sweet spot around the 9-10 minute mark to strike with a one base force (again, expanding behind your push).
TvT: Well if you're Terran you should know this.
Defensive TvZ: If you do not see an expo up by 3 to 4 minutes, you are going to get baneling busted guaranteed sometime between 5 and 6 minutes. Build a huge wall. If you survive, you win.
Roach push comes around 5:30-6 minutes, just have a bunker.
Mutas around 7-9, have one or two turrets (not more)
TvP: Zealot and stalker poke comes around 5:00-5:30.
DT comes around 7-8. If you scout double gas at or before 3:30, expect DT (or void, but a turret counters both).
TvT: Banshee comes around 6-6:30, nothing else is very scary from Terran as long as you get a seige tank and made sure to build marines.
Become a master of timing and you will A) not lose games from being late getting detection or a bunker up in time and B) win by hitting people with timing attacks.
-Mazer
TL threaders: I know this is not a comprehensive list and that timing attacks can be held off by skilled players. However, in all honesty, the gap in skill between high diamond and low diamond is simply huge*. This post is to help someone get from Plat to mid-diamond.
*My theory being that many people find a cheese or gimmick to get them up to diamond, but fail to develop the true diamond level mechanics, control, and decision making necessary to win a non-cheese/gimmick game.
I remembered seeing a thread somewhere about the list of icons a TL user can get. It showed different ones for each race and how many posts were required to reach them. Can anyone provide me a link to it? I have searched frantically, but to no avail. Also, can you choose which icon you can have, as long as you unlocked it?
Why there is no DJ wheat fanclub? And if there is, i can find only miniWheat's thread. Today on Live on three Wheat was droping some gems that should be posted ^^
On June 09 2011 10:08 RM_12 wrote: Why there is no DJ wheat fanclub? And if there is, i can find only miniWheat's thread. Today on Live on three Wheat was droping some gems that should be posted ^^
On June 09 2011 09:08 edc.initiative wrote: I remembered seeing a thread somewhere about the list of icons a TL user can get. It showed different ones for each race and how many posts were required to reach them. Can anyone provide me a link to it? I have searched frantically, but to no avail. Also, can you choose which icon you can have, as long as you unlocked it?
On June 06 2011 13:23 RM_12 wrote: Why aren't top Protoss players using Phenix's PvT?
I recently played PvT when i was behind after his fast expo but i was able to keep colosus alive forever because of phenix in my unit mix, and he couldn't win any engagement, eventually loosing while 1 base up over me ^^. You usually go zealot-sentry-stalker-colosus and tech to templar but if you add 1 stargate and keep making phenix you suddenly win every engagement.
You can kill vikings without suiciding your stalkers to marauder ball, and kill medivacs. Also phenixes attacking vikings allow you to move forward with colossus to deal demage and not die in few viking shots. It's much easier to micro, and terran can't go marines (you have ever growing colossus count) and if they don't transition out of marauder ball you have the ability to add VR's and roflstomp Terran even harder.
Srsly they are not expensive and you don't even need to micro them, just a move and control ground battle with FF while your Phenixes just kill anything above the ground.
So i wonder, what is the biggest weakness of incorporating phenixes into standard chargelot-sentry-stalker-colosus that pro's don't use it?
This is your erroneous assumption, and one of the main reasons players don't incorporate phoenixes into their late-game armies.
The point is to add it in mid game, because they are great in late game composition (200/200) and they allow you to retain your colossus much much easier.
if the terran reacts well enough with 2 starport reactors then all they have to do is take out the colossus quickly before the vikings go down, emp the pheonixes, then they become useless
so basically they'll have marauders left over vs. your phoenixes with no energy
You don;t need energy on phenixes, you have them to only kill vikings and medivacs while making your other units survive ALOT longer (unless you are against tanks, then you need to dodge emp's which with phenix speed is easier than with any other unit)
What happens if the terran does a timing attack with pure bio in the midgame or goes pure bio + ghost in the late game? You won't have the gateway units or the colossi count to deal with it since all your gas will be eaten up in your phoenixes. Phoenix-Colossus compositions work best on maps where you can turtle in your natural and third (e.g. Terminus, Tal'Darim Altar, Scrap Station, etc.) and in situations where you force vikings (colossi before stargate, which is the opposite of your plan).
The issues are how to incorporate phoenixes into your overall gameplan and setting up your opponent to make that viking-heavy army.
(colossi before stargate, which is the opposite of your plan
You misunderstood.
If you see no starport with observer, you won't add stargate. I'm talking about adding phenixes when you already have few colossi. They have short producton time and are not expensive for how usefull they become. If you open with robo and start colossus production relatively early, terran have to go for some timing or add vikings. If he goes for timing, you have units countering his units, if he adds starports and goes for late game you add stargate and gain upper hand in engagements, because it works out extremly well. I encourage everyone to try it and see how you can move forward with entire army without exposing your colossus nor stalkers.
When terran dodges colossi with marauder ball and moves vikings forward you have to move colossi back and get stalkers in range of vikings to snipe them leaving your stalkers in range of marauders while they are out of colossi range. When you add phenixes you can suddenly a-move and still beat this terran composition. It made HUGE difference for me in this MU, that's why i'm suprised it's not commonly used.
I use phoenix in the way you discribed in almost every late game PVT situation, they are so useful for taking out vikings, i always go for +1 attack so i need even less to take out larger amounts of vikings, even if he outnumbers me in vikings and kills all my phoenix it gives me enough time to do extensive damage with my collosus, incontrol used it in a game at MLG to decent effect i think, i cant remember if he won that game i think it was vs major he may have lost, but he stopped producing pheonix's in the laate laate game, maybe thats why he lost
On June 06 2011 11:00 Vansetsu wrote: So... I have kind of felt this way since the roach got +1 (4) range buff. Zerg played correctly at the highest mechanical and strategical level is very strong. In particular against a Protoss. Discluding early to maybe mid game, I feel like even the best Zerg can generate too much income and and can either re-macro strong unit compositions too fast or stockpile and do other things.
I tried to think of a solution for this for a long time, and finally I think I may have come up with a feasible concept - Charging resources for every creep tumor put on the map (initial tumor possibley being free), and maybe charging a slow mineral rate, ala an scv repairing something, for overlords dropping creep. I have no idea what the amounts charged would be, maybe something like 25m?
Creep is free vision, free expansion denial, and free speed advantage. I think forcing the Zerg to passively spend a little of the massive amount of excess minerals they can macro up in SC2 and making creep something of "resource based value" to attack would maybe make the PvZ match up a tad bit more balanced (before the roach range increase, stalkers could harass roaches without speed and kite with good micro ect.) It also makes a stockpiled zerg a little more accountable for how he chooses to engage with units, even if they are in a "throw away army". However, I'm not sure how this would adversely effect TvZ, as creep is often quickly and easily destroyed... but it's something I have been thinking about a lot.
I'd love to hear some intelligent, non bias feedback on the idea. (if that's possible )
Really, the bias in your post kind of makes it hard to come from an unbiased point of view. You state that you believe zerg macro to be too strong; This may or may not be true and is the basis for your suggested nerf. As a zerg player I would love it if creep was removed from the game and some units like the queen and the hydralisk were buffed/changed to compensate.
Btw, you have a unit that is invisible and can see creep tumors. Use it.
I can sort of see where the orgional poster is coming from about Zerg being able to re-max really quickly. But thats the way Zerg was designed to be played. a 200/200 zerg army will be crushed by a 200/200 protoss army because zerg units are generally weaker, so zerg relies on being able to re-max and do the 300 food push, and even then it is sometimes not enough to kill the origional 200/200 protoss army.
I don't think creep should be removed or cost money, it's a good tool for zerg to use and gives zergs a change against T and P armies with the vision and speed advantage.
Also as the second poster says "you have a unit that is invisible and can see creep tumors. Use it."
after reading your (Vansetsu) post about charging zerg for creep and their ability to over macro a couple of times, i have to reiterate the same things that have been posted between here and the original post, but pointing out that all the constructive ideas coming from other players are about changing up your play against Z, while your primary ideas are based on nerfing Z. Balance will always be a discussion going on, however not by me as im still becoming intimate with the deep mechanics of everything. My long winded point is this, instead of targeting economic and vision strengths that are hard for you to overcome, implying that they are too strong, develop on your weaknesses that the zerg gameplay mechanics are benefiting from. Not only that, but when talking on macro, (and i realize this is a highly loose idea and may not be specifically pertinent) remember that every race has a way to boost macro, whether they are doing that, or chrono'ing out tech and units only second post so if i need to read quite a bit more before talking, just let me know. otherwise glhf and see you at the barricade (always looking to practice and get better PM me)
I was just wondering if anyone else is bothered by the cost of spine crawlers. I'm not talking about the 100 mins but rather to whole economic impact. Since a drone is consumed and you need to make another to replace it so the actual cost of a spine is more along the lines of 200 mins. As a zerg who early expos and sacrifice early attacking units I would feel better if they were cheaper. Anyone else feel this way?
I was just wondering if anyone else is bothered by the cost of spine crawlers. I'm not talking about the 100 mins but rather to whole economic impact. Since a drone is consumed and you need to make another to replace it so the actual cost of a spine is more along the lines of 200 mins. As a zerg who early expos and sacrifice early attacking units I would feel better if they were cheaper. Anyone else feel this way?
A bunker costs 100 min but doesn't do anything unless you put a marine (50 mineral) in it. So a crawler costs Z 100 min+ 50 min (drone) + lost mining time. Bunker costs T 100 + 50 (marine) + scv's lost mining time. Cannon costs P 150 min.
Seems pretty fair to me, toss being the only one with a slight but negligible advantage when you consider crawlers can be repositioned and bunkers can be sold back to the mineral gods.
I was just wondering if anyone else is bothered by the cost of spine crawlers. I'm not talking about the 100 mins but rather to whole economic impact. Since a drone is consumed and you need to make another to replace it so the actual cost of a spine is more along the lines of 200 mins. As a zerg who early expos and sacrifice early attacking units I would feel better if they were cheaper. Anyone else feel this way?
A bunker costs 100 min but doesn't do anything unless you put a marine (50 mineral) in it. So a crawler costs Z 100 min+ 50 min (drone) + lost mining time. Bunker costs T 100 + 50 (marine) + scv's lost mining time. Cannon costs P 150 min.
Seems pretty fair to me, toss being the only one with a slight but negligible advantage when you consider crawlers can be repositioned and bunkers can be sold back to the mineral gods.
For me static defense balance is ok, after salvage fix its cool.
I was just wondering. Why is it that the massive air unit demarcation exists? Is there any reason for it. Obviously ground units see a benefit. But massive air units don't seem to be any different from normal ones.
On June 10 2011 00:59 Vorinclex wrote: I was just wondering if anyone else is bothered by the cost of spine crawlers. I'm not talking about the 100 mins but rather to whole economic impact. Since a drone is consumed and you need to make another to replace it so the actual cost of a spine is more along the lines of 200 mins. As a zerg who early expos and sacrifice early attacking units I would feel better if they were cheaper. Anyone else feel this way?
Scans cost 270 minerals so morphing a building with a drone must cost INFINITE MINERALS!
No seriously, the cost of a spine is 150 minerals. End of story.
The morphin time is a bit painful imo but the trade off is 6 pools aren't as easy to sneak in.
We hear a lot about macro-oriented players, but are there any micro-oriented players? Obviously all pros want to have a strong macro game, so is it even worth describing someone as macro-oriented?
I was just wondering if anyone else is bothered by the cost of spine crawlers. I'm not talking about the 100 mins but rather to whole economic impact. Since a drone is consumed and you need to make another to replace it so the actual cost of a spine is more along the lines of 200 mins. As a zerg who early expos and sacrifice early attacking units I would feel better if they were cheaper. Anyone else feel this way?
A bunker costs 100 min but doesn't do anything unless you put a marine (50 mineral) in it. So a crawler costs Z 100 min+ 50 min (drone) + lost mining time. Bunker costs T 100 + 50 (marine) + scv's lost mining time. Cannon costs P 150 min.
Seems pretty fair to me, toss being the only one with a slight but negligible advantage when you consider crawlers can be repositioned and bunkers can be sold back to the mineral gods.
except you would be building marines anyways. you might as well say a cannon costs 250 then since you need pylon power.
opportunity cost is also measured by the biggest alternative forgone, not the sum of everything you could have done with that drone.
If you want to play on EU Starcraft 2 with only NA client installed, do you have to install both an NA or EU client or can you easily switch between them (assuming you have both an NA account and EU account bought)?
Edit - My question is now if you install two clients on one computer, will it overwrite the profile (Not in program files but in the username folder with all the game settings and replays)?
Like, I never really "rage" about imbalance, even when P, at the start, was weaker than T and Z because back then I could look at a game that I lost and figure out why I lost and how to react in situations to change the outcome. But now, PvZ is literally impossible to win.
On any map not named Shakuras or Tal Darim, I can't secure a natural without going either 3WG/SG or 3WG/DT both of which are countered by a simple spore and both builds pretty much give them a timing to kill me or give them free reign to just mass drone to 70 and then non stop attack me.
The timing Zerg's can hit are ridiculously broken, 2 base roach push after rushing 45 drones is broken. 2 base hydra ling is broken if P does any sort of WG expand whether it be a void ray or dark templar. Any sort of muta / ling build can coin flip win if you try to go early robo, if that happens P will never get a third up.
And even if I just do a 3 WG expand and they don't losirafuck me they can just take 4 base and build a zillion drones and unless I do some all in gateway timing I can't stop it.
I think it's hilarious though how when Zergs were crying about Protoss being imba ZvP was still a winnable matchup for them, it wasn't impossible and every competent Protoss was saying the same thing .. " you aren't doin it right". Now though, win PvZ is unwinnable you hardly hear anything from the P players. The problem is though, I've gone over everything and there ARE NO BUILDS THAT DON'T PUT ME AT A NEAR UNWINNABLE DISADVANTAGE unless I'm going all in of course. It's such a joke, I watch games where I play perfectly and I can't figure out how to change anything or why I lost other than the fact that Z is broken. The shitty zerg's I'm losing to ... it's such a joke.
On June 10 2011 06:06 MazerRackham wrote: + Show Spoiler + Show nested quote +
A bunker costs 100 min but doesn't do anything unless you put a marine (50 mineral) in it. So a crawler costs Z 100 min+ 50 min (drone) + lost mining time. Bunker costs T 100 + 50 (marine) + scv's lost mining time. Cannon costs P 150 min.
Seems pretty fair to me, toss being the only one with a slight but negligible advantage when you consider crawlers can be repositioned and bunkers can be sold back to the mineral gods.
except you would be building marines anyways. you might as well say a cannon costs 250 then since you need pylon power.
opportunity cost is also measured by the biggest alternative forgone, not the sum of everything you could have done with that drone.
I don't know how many terrans would build extra marines for defense if bunkers could attack without requiring marines. And as bunkers and spine crawlers don't give supply, much less marines who drain 1 supply, I'm not sold that a pylon should count as part if the cost of a cannon.
I'm not speaking against your second point about opportunity cost, but could you clarify for me what you believe is the biggest alternative foregone by a drone that becomes a crawler?
On June 10 2011 14:11 shinyA wrote: Like, I never really "rage" about imbalance, even when P, at the start, was weaker than T and Z because back then I could look at a game that I lost and figure out why I lost and how to react in situations to change the outcome. But now, PvZ is literally impossible to win.
On any map not named Shakuras or Tal Darim, I can't secure a natural without going either 3WG/SG or 3WG/DT both of which are countered by a simple spore and both builds pretty much give them a timing to kill me or give them free reign to just mass drone to 70 and then non stop attack me.
The timing Zerg's can hit are ridiculously broken, 2 base roach push after rushing 45 drones is broken. 2 base hydra ling is broken if P does any sort of WG expand whether it be a void ray or dark templar. Any sort of muta / ling build can coin flip win if you try to go early robo, if that happens P will never get a third up.
And even if I just do a 3 WG expand and they don't losirafuck me they can just take 4 base and build a zillion drones and unless I do some all in gateway timing I can't stop it.
I think it's hilarious though how when Zergs were crying about Protoss being imba ZvP was still a winnable matchup for them, it wasn't impossible and every competent Protoss was saying the same thing .. " you aren't doin it right". Now though, win PvZ is unwinnable you hardly hear anything from the P players. The problem is though, I've gone over everything and there ARE NO BUILDS THAT DON'T PUT ME AT A NEAR UNWINNABLE DISADVANTAGE unless I'm going all in of course. It's such a joke, I watch games where I play perfectly and I can't figure out how to change anything or why I lost other than the fact that Z is broken. The shitty zerg's I'm losing to ... it's such a joke.
I hate this game
Protoss here. I hate it when anyone calls something broken, even more so when a fellow Toss does because it gives me less justification to make fun of the "Zerg QQ" stereotype
Whenever someone gives their "I've tried everything and nothing works, boo hoo! Race X is broken! QQ" sob story, it makes my head hurt. How do you think, at the top level, Protoss players beat Zergs, Zergs far better than the ones you're facing? I know it's tempting to give in to frustration, but come on... there is so much evidence that PvZ isn't broken that using your own experiences, no matter how frustrating they may be, to justify your "PvZ is broken" opinion is flat out wrong (this argument applies to anyone whining about a broken matchup.. it's very likely that it isn't). Why not post to the strategy section with replays? You're obviously doing stuff wrong.
On June 10 2011 14:11 shinyA wrote: Like, I never really "rage" about imbalance, even when P, at the start, was weaker than T and Z because back then I could look at a game that I lost and figure out why I lost and how to react in situations to change the outcome. But now, PvZ is literally impossible to win.
On any map not named Shakuras or Tal Darim, I can't secure a natural without going either 3WG/SG or 3WG/DT both of which are countered by a simple spore and both builds pretty much give them a timing to kill me or give them free reign to just mass drone to 70 and then non stop attack me.
The timing Zerg's can hit are ridiculously broken, 2 base roach push after rushing 45 drones is broken. 2 base hydra ling is broken if P does any sort of WG expand whether it be a void ray or dark templar. Any sort of muta / ling build can coin flip win if you try to go early robo, if that happens P will never get a third up.
And even if I just do a 3 WG expand and they don't losirafuck me they can just take 4 base and build a zillion drones and unless I do some all in gateway timing I can't stop it.
I think it's hilarious though how when Zergs were crying about Protoss being imba ZvP was still a winnable matchup for them, it wasn't impossible and every competent Protoss was saying the same thing .. " you aren't doin it right". Now though, win PvZ is unwinnable you hardly hear anything from the P players. The problem is though, I've gone over everything and there ARE NO BUILDS THAT DON'T PUT ME AT A NEAR UNWINNABLE DISADVANTAGE unless I'm going all in of course. It's such a joke, I watch games where I play perfectly and I can't figure out how to change anything or why I lost other than the fact that Z is broken. The shitty zerg's I'm losing to ... it's such a joke.
I hate this game
Protoss here. I hate it when anyone calls something broken, even more so when a fellow Toss does because it gives me less justification to make fun of the "Zerg QQ" stereotype
Whenever someone gives their "I've tried everything and nothing works, boo hoo! Race X is broken! QQ" sob story, it makes my head hurt. How do you think, at the top level, Protoss players beat Zergs, Zergs far better than the ones you're facing? I know it's tempting to give in to frustration, but come on... there is so much evidence that PvZ isn't broken that using your own experiences, no matter how frustrating they may be, to justify your "PvZ is broken" opinion is flat out wrong (this argument applies to anyone whining about a broken matchup.. it's very likely that it isn't). Why not post to the strategy section with replays? You're obviously doing stuff wrong.
Protoss' don't win at a high level.
I'm grandmaster and I play against top zergs all the time?
I've noticed from watching streams/replays that tosses in their wallin always put the gateway tugging the wall so it doesnt have the zealot by it. It can't be a coincidence that pretty much all of them do this - but I don't know why. Could somebody enlighten me (I realize it is a bit of a tiny detail in the grand scheme of things)?
On June 10 2011 14:11 shinyA wrote: Like, I never really "rage" about imbalance, even when P, at the start, was weaker than T and Z because back then I could look at a game that I lost and figure out why I lost and how to react in situations to change the outcome. But now, PvZ is literally impossible to win.
On any map not named Shakuras or Tal Darim, I can't secure a natural without going either 3WG/SG or 3WG/DT both of which are countered by a simple spore and both builds pretty much give them a timing to kill me or give them free reign to just mass drone to 70 and then non stop attack me.
The timing Zerg's can hit are ridiculously broken, 2 base roach push after rushing 45 drones is broken. 2 base hydra ling is broken if P does any sort of WG expand whether it be a void ray or dark templar. Any sort of muta / ling build can coin flip win if you try to go early robo, if that happens P will never get a third up.
And even if I just do a 3 WG expand and they don't losirafuck me they can just take 4 base and build a zillion drones and unless I do some all in gateway timing I can't stop it.
I think it's hilarious though how when Zergs were crying about Protoss being imba ZvP was still a winnable matchup for them, it wasn't impossible and every competent Protoss was saying the same thing .. " you aren't doin it right". Now though, win PvZ is unwinnable you hardly hear anything from the P players. The problem is though, I've gone over everything and there ARE NO BUILDS THAT DON'T PUT ME AT A NEAR UNWINNABLE DISADVANTAGE unless I'm going all in of course. It's such a joke, I watch games where I play perfectly and I can't figure out how to change anything or why I lost other than the fact that Z is broken. The shitty zerg's I'm losing to ... it's such a joke.
I hate this game
Protoss here. I hate it when anyone calls something broken, even more so when a fellow Toss does because it gives me less justification to make fun of the "Zerg QQ" stereotype
Whenever someone gives their "I've tried everything and nothing works, boo hoo! Race X is broken! QQ" sob story, it makes my head hurt. How do you think, at the top level, Protoss players beat Zergs, Zergs far better than the ones you're facing? I know it's tempting to give in to frustration, but come on... there is so much evidence that PvZ isn't broken that using your own experiences, no matter how frustrating they may be, to justify your "PvZ is broken" opinion is flat out wrong (this argument applies to anyone whining about a broken matchup.. it's very likely that it isn't). Why not post to the strategy section with replays? You're obviously doing stuff wrong.
Protoss' don't win at a high level.
I'm grandmaster and I play against top zergs all the time?
No offence shinyA, but it sounds like the people your playing are just better then you. Why does other top protosses win over top zergs all the time and vice versa? Don't use yourself as an example to call out an imbalance please, it's honestly pretty stupid.
On June 10 2011 14:11 shinyA wrote: Like, I never really "rage" about imbalance, even when P, at the start, was weaker than T and Z because back then I could look at a game that I lost and figure out why I lost and how to react in situations to change the outcome. But now, PvZ is literally impossible to win.
On any map not named Shakuras or Tal Darim, I can't secure a natural without going either 3WG/SG or 3WG/DT both of which are countered by a simple spore and both builds pretty much give them a timing to kill me or give them free reign to just mass drone to 70 and then non stop attack me.
The timing Zerg's can hit are ridiculously broken, 2 base roach push after rushing 45 drones is broken. 2 base hydra ling is broken if P does any sort of WG expand whether it be a void ray or dark templar. Any sort of muta / ling build can coin flip win if you try to go early robo, if that happens P will never get a third up.
And even if I just do a 3 WG expand and they don't losirafuck me they can just take 4 base and build a zillion drones and unless I do some all in gateway timing I can't stop it.
I think it's hilarious though how when Zergs were crying about Protoss being imba ZvP was still a winnable matchup for them, it wasn't impossible and every competent Protoss was saying the same thing .. " you aren't doin it right". Now though, win PvZ is unwinnable you hardly hear anything from the P players. The problem is though, I've gone over everything and there ARE NO BUILDS THAT DON'T PUT ME AT A NEAR UNWINNABLE DISADVANTAGE unless I'm going all in of course. It's such a joke, I watch games where I play perfectly and I can't figure out how to change anything or why I lost other than the fact that Z is broken. The shitty zerg's I'm losing to ... it's such a joke.
I hate this game
Protoss here. I hate it when anyone calls something broken, even more so when a fellow Toss does because it gives me less justification to make fun of the "Zerg QQ" stereotype
Whenever someone gives their "I've tried everything and nothing works, boo hoo! Race X is broken! QQ" sob story, it makes my head hurt. How do you think, at the top level, Protoss players beat Zergs, Zergs far better than the ones you're facing? I know it's tempting to give in to frustration, but come on... there is so much evidence that PvZ isn't broken that using your own experiences, no matter how frustrating they may be, to justify your "PvZ is broken" opinion is flat out wrong (this argument applies to anyone whining about a broken matchup.. it's very likely that it isn't). Why not post to the strategy section with replays? You're obviously doing stuff wrong.
Protoss' don't win at a high level.
I'm grandmaster and I play against top zergs all the time?
No offence shinyA, but it sounds like the people your playing are just better then you. Why does other top protosses win over top zergs all the time and vice versa? Don't use yourself as an example to call out an imbalance please, it's honestly pretty stupid.
Don't care what it sounds like, I've beaten and played almost every "top" zerg player that plays on NA. But please, show me examples of P's beating Z's. Why is there only 1 P in the top 16 of the super tournament? Why did Z do so well at MLG?
Counter my points, I listed why I feel the way I do and you don't attempt to refute any of my arguments. What's "honestly pretty stupid" is you making assumptions when you really have no clue what you're talking about =)
Pretty funny you bring up the NA server to someone from Sweden.
The questions still there. Many people in the grandmaster leagues are Protoss. I don't see any imbalance, just older build orders being countered after a few months of analysis.
On June 10 2011 17:21 Complete wrote: I've noticed from watching streams/replays that tosses in their wallin always put the gateway tugging the wall so it doesnt have the zealot by it. It can't be a coincidence that pretty much all of them do this - but I don't know why. Could somebody enlighten me (I realize it is a bit of a tiny detail in the grand scheme of things)?
Which is safer?
I'd rather have one direction units can come in from than 2 10/10 times.
the irradiate thing. i think they could have it in sc2 but maybe with a little bit less Area of effect. cause if units clump more, hell just decrease the area of damage. Hunter seeker missile wasn't a good replacement at all.
On June 10 2011 14:11 shinyA wrote: Like, I never really "rage" about imbalance, even when P, at the start, was weaker than T and Z because back then I could look at a game that I lost and figure out why I lost and how to react in situations to change the outcome. But now, PvZ is literally impossible to win.
On any map not named Shakuras or Tal Darim, I can't secure a natural without going either 3WG/SG or 3WG/DT both of which are countered by a simple spore and both builds pretty much give them a timing to kill me or give them free reign to just mass drone to 70 and then non stop attack me.
The timing Zerg's can hit are ridiculously broken, 2 base roach push after rushing 45 drones is broken. 2 base hydra ling is broken if P does any sort of WG expand whether it be a void ray or dark templar. Any sort of muta / ling build can coin flip win if you try to go early robo, if that happens P will never get a third up.
And even if I just do a 3 WG expand and they don't losirafuck me they can just take 4 base and build a zillion drones and unless I do some all in gateway timing I can't stop it.
I think it's hilarious though how when Zergs were crying about Protoss being imba ZvP was still a winnable matchup for them, it wasn't impossible and every competent Protoss was saying the same thing .. " you aren't doin it right". Now though, win PvZ is unwinnable you hardly hear anything from the P players. The problem is though, I've gone over everything and there ARE NO BUILDS THAT DON'T PUT ME AT A NEAR UNWINNABLE DISADVANTAGE unless I'm going all in of course. It's such a joke, I watch games where I play perfectly and I can't figure out how to change anything or why I lost other than the fact that Z is broken. The shitty zerg's I'm losing to ... it's such a joke.
I hate this game
Protoss here. I hate it when anyone calls something broken, even more so when a fellow Toss does because it gives me less justification to make fun of the "Zerg QQ" stereotype
Whenever someone gives their "I've tried everything and nothing works, boo hoo! Race X is broken! QQ" sob story, it makes my head hurt. How do you think, at the top level, Protoss players beat Zergs, Zergs far better than the ones you're facing? I know it's tempting to give in to frustration, but come on... there is so much evidence that PvZ isn't broken that using your own experiences, no matter how frustrating they may be, to justify your "PvZ is broken" opinion is flat out wrong (this argument applies to anyone whining about a broken matchup.. it's very likely that it isn't). Why not post to the strategy section with replays? You're obviously doing stuff wrong.
Protoss' don't win at a high level.
I'm grandmaster and I play against top zergs all the time?
No offence shinyA, but it sounds like the people your playing are just better then you. Why does other top protosses win over top zergs all the time and vice versa? Don't use yourself as an example to call out an imbalance please, it's honestly pretty stupid.
Don't care what it sounds like, I've beaten and played almost every "top" zerg player that plays on NA. But please, show me examples of P's beating Z's. Why is there only 1 P in the top 16 of the super tournament? Why did Z do so well at MLG?
Counter my points, I listed why I feel the way I do and you don't attempt to refute any of my arguments. What's "honestly pretty stupid" is you making assumptions when you really have no clue what you're talking about =)
Don't complain about Imbalance ShinYa. This is a toss player to a toss player. We are freaken great. Our pros like incontrol, Tyler, Naniwa(even tho watchnig Nani losing to slush is MLG was painful) and white-ra don't complain about imbalance we shouldn't either. If it takes 10 times more skill for us to beat a whiner zerg, we will reach that skill and crush them with a smile. Don't fall into the Idra mentatility, practice more and win more.
On June 10 2011 14:11 shinyA wrote: Like, I never really "rage" about imbalance, even when P, at the start, was weaker than T and Z because back then I could look at a game that I lost and figure out why I lost and how to react in situations to change the outcome. But now, PvZ is literally impossible to win.
On any map not named Shakuras or Tal Darim, I can't secure a natural without going either 3WG/SG or 3WG/DT both of which are countered by a simple spore and both builds pretty much give them a timing to kill me or give them free reign to just mass drone to 70 and then non stop attack me.
The timing Zerg's can hit are ridiculously broken, 2 base roach push after rushing 45 drones is broken. 2 base hydra ling is broken if P does any sort of WG expand whether it be a void ray or dark templar. Any sort of muta / ling build can coin flip win if you try to go early robo, if that happens P will never get a third up.
And even if I just do a 3 WG expand and they don't losirafuck me they can just take 4 base and build a zillion drones and unless I do some all in gateway timing I can't stop it.
I think it's hilarious though how when Zergs were crying about Protoss being imba ZvP was still a winnable matchup for them, it wasn't impossible and every competent Protoss was saying the same thing .. " you aren't doin it right". Now though, win PvZ is unwinnable you hardly hear anything from the P players. The problem is though, I've gone over everything and there ARE NO BUILDS THAT DON'T PUT ME AT A NEAR UNWINNABLE DISADVANTAGE unless I'm going all in of course. It's such a joke, I watch games where I play perfectly and I can't figure out how to change anything or why I lost other than the fact that Z is broken. The shitty zerg's I'm losing to ... it's such a joke.
I hate this game
Protoss here. I hate it when anyone calls something broken, even more so when a fellow Toss does because it gives me less justification to make fun of the "Zerg QQ" stereotype
Whenever someone gives their "I've tried everything and nothing works, boo hoo! Race X is broken! QQ" sob story, it makes my head hurt. How do you think, at the top level, Protoss players beat Zergs, Zergs far better than the ones you're facing? I know it's tempting to give in to frustration, but come on... there is so much evidence that PvZ isn't broken that using your own experiences, no matter how frustrating they may be, to justify your "PvZ is broken" opinion is flat out wrong (this argument applies to anyone whining about a broken matchup.. it's very likely that it isn't). Why not post to the strategy section with replays? You're obviously doing stuff wrong.
Protoss' don't win at a high level.
I'm grandmaster and I play against top zergs all the time?
No offence shinyA, but it sounds like the people your playing are just better then you. Why does other top protosses win over top zergs all the time and vice versa? Don't use yourself as an example to call out an imbalance please, it's honestly pretty stupid.
I have to side with shinyA here, and although most of you will think it's biased, there is PLENTY of example at the top level that he is correct. MLG? 2 protoss in the top 16, one being arguably the best player in the planet, and the other undoubtedly the best protoss outside of korea. Super Tournament? A single protoss in the top 16, who SHOULD have been eliminated if Leenock was smart enough to not split up his roaches and broods when he basically had the ace match won.
The state of the game has completely shifted to the point where Zerg is being constantly shown as the best race. I honestly even feel that Terrans are much worse off, to the point where if they don't kill the zerg or do a ridiculous amount of damage early on, they actually cannot win if the Zerg players properly.
Between the counter-attack/hyper-aggression focused style and things like baneling bombs (in min lines, on armies and burrowed), mass doom drops (one upgrade = 30 dropships instantly), being extremely more mobile than the other two races, having great core units (roach/muta/ling), being the best macro race but also being able to hold a lot of attacks with minimal preparation due to spawn larva, having the best caster in the game AND having a map pool that greatly benefits the strengths of the race, it's hard to argue against Z > T and P right now.
Not saying necessary a game imbalance, but certainly a state of the game imbalance. And while looking at it, it's honestly hard to see what protoss could do differently. I was saying give up hydras and use baneling bombs way back in season 3, I was telling people to use nydus more and to never engage and to not just sit in your base and attack. As soon as the infestor buff hit, I knew it would be game changing. Not saying I'm a genius or anything (I would go to the GSL if I was ), but there was always something that I knew Zergs could do that they just wouldn't, instead sticking with their roach hydra corruptor.
There's honestly nothing I can see protoss doing right now. You're stuck between relying on being way better than your opponent to win, or all-inning. Can't see (and havn't seen) a protoss beat an equally skilled zerg in a long straight up game in ages.
Nothing like the Golds telling the Grandmasters what to do. I think it is pretty clear that Toss is a lot less scary after the warp gate nerf, which lets both terrans, and especially zergs, play much more greedily in the early game with relative inconsequence.
Not to mention the new Idra Roach/Immortal build :-)
On June 10 2011 14:11 shinyA wrote: Like, I never really "rage" about imbalance, even when P, at the start, was weaker than T and Z because back then I could look at a game that I lost and figure out why I lost and how to react in situations to change the outcome. But now, PvZ is literally impossible to win.
On any map not named Shakuras or Tal Darim, I can't secure a natural without going either 3WG/SG or 3WG/DT both of which are countered by a simple spore and both builds pretty much give them a timing to kill me or give them free reign to just mass drone to 70 and then non stop attack me.
The timing Zerg's can hit are ridiculously broken, 2 base roach push after rushing 45 drones is broken. 2 base hydra ling is broken if P does any sort of WG expand whether it be a void ray or dark templar. Any sort of muta / ling build can coin flip win if you try to go early robo, if that happens P will never get a third up.
And even if I just do a 3 WG expand and they don't losirafuck me they can just take 4 base and build a zillion drones and unless I do some all in gateway timing I can't stop it.
I think it's hilarious though how when Zergs were crying about Protoss being imba ZvP was still a winnable matchup for them, it wasn't impossible and every competent Protoss was saying the same thing .. " you aren't doin it right". Now though, win PvZ is unwinnable you hardly hear anything from the P players. The problem is though, I've gone over everything and there ARE NO BUILDS THAT DON'T PUT ME AT A NEAR UNWINNABLE DISADVANTAGE unless I'm going all in of course. It's such a joke, I watch games where I play perfectly and I can't figure out how to change anything or why I lost other than the fact that Z is broken. The shitty zerg's I'm losing to ... it's such a joke.
I hate this game
Protoss here. I hate it when anyone calls something broken, even more so when a fellow Toss does because it gives me less justification to make fun of the "Zerg QQ" stereotype
Whenever someone gives their "I've tried everything and nothing works, boo hoo! Race X is broken! QQ" sob story, it makes my head hurt. How do you think, at the top level, Protoss players beat Zergs, Zergs far better than the ones you're facing? I know it's tempting to give in to frustration, but come on... there is so much evidence that PvZ isn't broken that using your own experiences, no matter how frustrating they may be, to justify your "PvZ is broken" opinion is flat out wrong (this argument applies to anyone whining about a broken matchup.. it's very likely that it isn't). Why not post to the strategy section with replays? You're obviously doing stuff wrong.
Protoss' don't win at a high level.
I'm grandmaster and I play against top zergs all the time?
No offence shinyA, but it sounds like the people your playing are just better then you. Why does other top protosses win over top zergs all the time and vice versa? Don't use yourself as an example to call out an imbalance please, it's honestly pretty stupid.
Don't care what it sounds like, I've beaten and played almost every "top" zerg player that plays on NA. But please, show me examples of P's beating Z's. Why is there only 1 P in the top 16 of the super tournament? Why did Z do so well at MLG?
Counter my points, I listed why I feel the way I do and you don't attempt to refute any of my arguments. What's "honestly pretty stupid" is you making assumptions when you really have no clue what you're talking about =)
Don't complain about Imbalance ShinYa. This is a toss player to a toss player. We are freaken great. Our pros like incontrol, Tyler, Naniwa(even tho watchnig Nani losing to slush is MLG was painful) and white-ra don't complain about imbalance we shouldn't either. If it takes 10 times more skill for us to beat a whiner zerg, we will reach that skill and crush them with a smile. Don't fall into the Idra mentatility, practice more and win more.
I totally agree with this it sum everything up, protoss is good, zerg is good, and terran is good, people just want justification for why they lose, so they dont blame it on themselves they blame the game.
Btw Slush is really good and rather underrated so give him some slack he is really good and has the skill to win.
I seriously can't figure out how anyone thinks they understand balance better than blizzard, or even pro-gamers.I'm starting to believe there's no such thing as imbalanced, just spoiled players. This is reminding me of WoW were every week another class/talent build was "unbeatable in area Nerf please"
Why don't people take more of stance like Day9 or oGsTheWind, and just adapt to (inevitable) change?
On June 06 2011 11:00 Vansetsu wrote: So... I have kind of felt this way since the roach got +1 (4) range buff. Zerg played correctly at the highest mechanical and strategical level is very strong. In particular against a Protoss. Discluding early to maybe mid game, I feel like even the best Zerg can generate too much income and and can either re-macro strong unit compositions too fast or stockpile and do other things.
I tried to think of a solution for this for a long time, and finally I think I may have come up with a feasible concept - Charging resources for every creep tumor put on the map (initial tumor possibley being free), and maybe charging a slow mineral rate, ala an scv repairing something, for overlords dropping creep. I have no idea what the amounts charged would be, maybe something like 25m?
Creep is free vision, free expansion denial, and free speed advantage. I think forcing the Zerg to passively spend a little of the massive amount of excess minerals they can macro up in SC2 and making creep something of "resource based value" to attack would maybe make the PvZ match up a tad bit more balanced (before the roach range increase, stalkers could harass roaches without speed and kite with good micro ect.) It also makes a stockpiled zerg a little more accountable for how he chooses to engage with units, even if they are in a "throw away army". However, I'm not sure how this would adversely effect TvZ, as creep is often quickly and easily destroyed... but it's something I have been thinking about a lot.
I'd love to hear some intelligent, non bias feedback on the idea. (if that's possible )
Really, the bias in your post kind of makes it hard to come from an unbiased point of view. You state that you believe zerg macro to be too strong; This may or may not be true and is the basis for your suggested nerf. As a zerg player I would love it if creep was removed from the game and some units like the queen and the hydralisk were buffed/changed to compensate.
Btw, you have a unit that is invisible and can see creep tumors. Use it.
I can sort of see where the orgional poster is coming from about Zerg being able to re-max really quickly. But thats the way Zerg was designed to be played. a 200/200 zerg army will be crushed by a 200/200 protoss army because zerg units are generally weaker, so zerg relies on being able to re-max and do the 300 food push, and even then it is sometimes not enough to kill the origional 200/200 protoss army.
I don't think creep should be removed or cost money, it's a good tool for zerg to use and gives zergs a change against T and P armies with the vision and speed advantage.
Also as the second poster says "you have a unit that is invisible and can see creep tumors. Use it."
I don't think any of you understood what I was saying.
First of all I wasn't talking about my PvZ. My masters level PvZ is somewhat irrelevant to the topic, and certainly not it's focus.
My post was about how I felt about Zerg mechanics in general. When watching high level games, I find that even the best Zergs and ones with strong macro have an over abundance of resources after a certain period. While I agree Zerg armies should to an extent be able to re-max into something else, I feel like a lot of Zergs can get away with very sloppy engagements. I feel that a throw-away army should at least have to be used effectively.
The other part of my argument which was somewhat intertwined, was to make creep something of resource value, therefore making it something worth (in resources) protecting/harassing in correlation to the amount of income they produce. I basically posted this for feedback on a interesting concept - I did not post it because I am upset at my PvZ.......... seriously -_- lol.
I think it would add a bit more depth to the matchup and make creep something a little more worth defending, while possibly slightly slowing down some Z timings if they want to have 5 creep tumors covering the entire map for vision or dumping creep highways ect. It also give P another good reason to attempt to take to the map.
Regardless this post was for discussing the idea of the concept, why it is good or bad. I just thought it was an interesting idea, and was hoping for some discussion under that pretense.
On June 10 2011 14:11 shinyA wrote: Like, I never really "rage" about imbalance, even when P, at the start, was weaker than T and Z because back then I could look at a game that I lost and figure out why I lost and how to react in situations to change the outcome. But now, PvZ is literally impossible to win.
On any map not named Shakuras or Tal Darim, I can't secure a natural without going either 3WG/SG or 3WG/DT both of which are countered by a simple spore and both builds pretty much give them a timing to kill me or give them free reign to just mass drone to 70 and then non stop attack me.
The timing Zerg's can hit are ridiculously broken, 2 base roach push after rushing 45 drones is broken. 2 base hydra ling is broken if P does any sort of WG expand whether it be a void ray or dark templar. Any sort of muta / ling build can coin flip win if you try to go early robo, if that happens P will never get a third up.
And even if I just do a 3 WG expand and they don't losirafuck me they can just take 4 base and build a zillion drones and unless I do some all in gateway timing I can't stop it.
I think it's hilarious though how when Zergs were crying about Protoss being imba ZvP was still a winnable matchup for them, it wasn't impossible and every competent Protoss was saying the same thing .. " you aren't doin it right". Now though, win PvZ is unwinnable you hardly hear anything from the P players. The problem is though, I've gone over everything and there ARE NO BUILDS THAT DON'T PUT ME AT A NEAR UNWINNABLE DISADVANTAGE unless I'm going all in of course. It's such a joke, I watch games where I play perfectly and I can't figure out how to change anything or why I lost other than the fact that Z is broken. The shitty zerg's I'm losing to ... it's such a joke.
I hate this game
Protoss here. I hate it when anyone calls something broken, even more so when a fellow Toss does because it gives me less justification to make fun of the "Zerg QQ" stereotype
Whenever someone gives their "I've tried everything and nothing works, boo hoo! Race X is broken! QQ" sob story, it makes my head hurt. How do you think, at the top level, Protoss players beat Zergs, Zergs far better than the ones you're facing? I know it's tempting to give in to frustration, but come on... there is so much evidence that PvZ isn't broken that using your own experiences, no matter how frustrating they may be, to justify your "PvZ is broken" opinion is flat out wrong (this argument applies to anyone whining about a broken matchup.. it's very likely that it isn't). Why not post to the strategy section with replays? You're obviously doing stuff wrong.
Protoss' don't win at a high level.
I'm grandmaster and I play against top zergs all the time?
I'd love to see the replay where you say you cant imagine you couldve done anything better. I'm having a reallllly hard time believing that.
On June 10 2011 19:50 Probe1 wrote: Pretty funny you bring up the NA server to someone from Sweden.
The questions still there. Many people in the grandmaster leagues are Protoss. I don't see any imbalance, just older build orders being countered after a few months of analysis.
On June 10 2011 17:21 Complete wrote: I've noticed from watching streams/replays that tosses in their wallin always put the gateway tugging the wall so it doesnt have the zealot by it. It can't be a coincidence that pretty much all of them do this - but I don't know why. Could somebody enlighten me (I realize it is a bit of a tiny detail in the grand scheme of things)?
Which is safer?
I'd rather have one direction units can come in from than 2 10/10 times.
nono
there is still only 1 gap, but they always put it by the core rather than the gateway.
On June 06 2011 11:00 Vansetsu wrote: So... I have kind of felt this way since the roach got +1 (4) range buff. Zerg played correctly at the highest mechanical and strategical level is very strong. In particular against a Protoss. Discluding early to maybe mid game, I feel like even the best Zerg can generate too much income and and can either re-macro strong unit compositions too fast or stockpile and do other things.
I tried to think of a solution for this for a long time, and finally I think I may have come up with a feasible concept - Charging resources for every creep tumor put on the map (initial tumor possibley being free), and maybe charging a slow mineral rate, ala an scv repairing something, for overlords dropping creep. I have no idea what the amounts charged would be, maybe something like 25m?
Creep is free vision, free expansion denial, and free speed advantage. I think forcing the Zerg to passively spend a little of the massive amount of excess minerals they can macro up in SC2 and making creep something of "resource based value" to attack would maybe make the PvZ match up a tad bit more balanced (before the roach range increase, stalkers could harass roaches without speed and kite with good micro ect.) It also makes a stockpiled zerg a little more accountable for how he chooses to engage with units, even if they are in a "throw away army". However, I'm not sure how this would adversely effect TvZ, as creep is often quickly and easily destroyed... but it's something I have been thinking about a lot.
I'd love to hear some intelligent, non bias feedback on the idea. (if that's possible )
Really, the bias in your post kind of makes it hard to come from an unbiased point of view. You state that you believe zerg macro to be too strong; This may or may not be true and is the basis for your suggested nerf. As a zerg player I would love it if creep was removed from the game and some units like the queen and the hydralisk were buffed/changed to compensate.
Btw, you have a unit that is invisible and can see creep tumors. Use it.
I can sort of see where the orgional poster is coming from about Zerg being able to re-max really quickly. But thats the way Zerg was designed to be played. a 200/200 zerg army will be crushed by a 200/200 protoss army because zerg units are generally weaker, so zerg relies on being able to re-max and do the 300 food push, and even then it is sometimes not enough to kill the origional 200/200 protoss army.
I don't think creep should be removed or cost money, it's a good tool for zerg to use and gives zergs a change against T and P armies with the vision and speed advantage.
Also as the second poster says "you have a unit that is invisible and can see creep tumors. Use it."
I don't think any of you understood what I was saying.
First of all I wasn't talking about my PvZ. My masters level PvZ is somewhat irrelevant to the topic, and certainly not it's focus.
My post was about how I felt about Zerg mechanics in general. When watching high level games, I find that even the best Zergs and ones with strong macro have an over abundance of resources after a certain period. While I agree Zerg armies should to an extent be able to re-max into something else, I feel like a lot of Zergs can get away with very sloppy engagements. I feel that a throw-away army should at least have to be used effectively.
The other part of my argument which was somewhat intertwined, was to make creep something of resource value, therefore making it something worth (in resources) protecting/harassing in correlation to the amount of income they produce. I basically posted this for feedback on a interesting concept - I did not post it because I am upset at my PvZ.......... seriously -_- lol.
I think it would add a bit more depth to the matchup and make creep something a little more worth defending, while possibly slightly slowing down some Z timings if they want to have 5 creep tumors covering the entire map for vision or dumping creep highways ect. It also give P another good reason to attempt to take to the map.
Regardless this post was for discussing the idea of the concept, why it is good or bad. I just thought it was an interesting idea, and was hoping for some discussion under that pretense.
When both races say the others OP i think its safe to conclude that the match up is pretty balanced for the moment.
Random question, hopefully this is the right place:
TvP, when going against a standard deathball style toss (stalker/sentry/collo/zeal), and using marauder/ghost/marine/viking/medivac... what's the general ratio of medivacs to vikings, and about how many ghosts do I want to have?
I feel like I mgiht overproduce ghosts, and underproduce vikings.
Also, if in my noobishness I'm missing many contributing factors, please shout. Thank you!
ALso if this is the wrong place, please yell at me.
- You used a 11/11 strategy in the 3rd set. On certain maps, when the terran player has good control, the 11/11 strategy can be a nightmare for zerg players to hold. I feel like I can win 95% of those games. When I use them against my teammates they get mad at me, so I only use them on the ladder against random people.
On June 11 2011 02:56 nathangonmad wrote: Why don't Raven Hunter Seeker missles see use to target down Sentries?
Nice point, sentries are quite slow they shouldn't be able to outrun them easily.
Also, forcing sentries back would allow MMM to get closer.....
Ghosts do the same job job for a cheaper price while at a longer range. To get HSM, you need the HSM tech, Corvid reactor tech, lots of time, and some ravens. This all more expensive AND less effective than a ghost casting EMP.
On June 11 2011 04:13 biamila wrote: Random question, hopefully this is the right place:
TvP, when going against a standard deathball style toss (stalker/sentry/collo/zeal), and using marauder/ghost/marine/viking/medivac... what's the general ratio of medivacs to vikings, and about how many ghosts do I want to have?
I feel like I mgiht overproduce ghosts, and underproduce vikings.
Also, if in my noobishness I'm missing many contributing factors, please shout. Thank you!
ALso if this is the wrong place, please yell at me.
well that completely depends on how many colossi he has. If he has no templars then I would argue vikings are definitely more important than ghosts. If he is pumping out a lot of colossi you could even go double reactor starport.
I have a question - You can add both a EU Starcraft 2 license on your account even if it's NA right?
I go to eu.battle.net (for example) and log in with my na account (which works).
I can just digitally purchase EU version and then download the client + use it to play on Europe server right? (It gave me a warning that I could only connect to the NA server when I was purchasing. Is that supposed to happen? Note it was definitely the EU site since the values were in euro and the site was eu.battle.net).
Also is there any automatic USD to euro conversion with credit card purchase on battle.net?
Finally can purchases be made through paypal?
Any help will be appreciated, thanks .
Edit: One more question >.> - How many of you can play on Europe with "noticeable" lag [if so how much approx]? If so are you on US west or east? Now I do remember playing a few Singapore games on WC3 and it wasn't too bad (though it was definitely noticeable).
How important is mouse accuracy in being good at SC2? Obviously if I take my time I can click accurately with ease, but if I try to move really quickly, I VERY rarely land on where I want. For example, I positioned a probe on the lower left area of my screen and another one on the upper right part of my screen, and when I tried to go from lower left to upper right and click on the probe there, I kept missing over and over - needless to say, my wrist felt kind of funny because I was putting too much effort into being accurate, and it was pretty irritating. If I go a bit more slowly it's much easier, but I'm just wondering how important it is to have really accurate clicking when you drag your mouse really quickly to do so if you want to be good.
Main reason why I'm wondering about this is because Day9 stressed mouse accuracy in one of his dailies, where he also mentioned to click on individual things rather than box them. He said that a remedy is to just adjust your mouse so you're comfortable, but I don't really think that helps you actually get fast drag-click accuracy because the distance always varies - there's a natural distance for your hand to drag if you go really quickly, and it's very hard to control.
On June 11 2011 13:42 HolyArrow wrote: How important is mouse accuracy in being good at SC2? Obviously if I take my time I can click accurately with ease, but if I try to move really quickly, I VERY rarely land on where I want. For example, I positioned a probe on the lower left area of my screen and another one on the upper right part of my screen, and when I tried to go from lower left to upper right and click on the probe there, I kept missing over and over - needless to say, my wrist felt kind of funny because I was putting too much effort into being accurate, and it was pretty irritating. If I go a bit more slowly it's much easier, but I'm just wondering how important it is to have really accurate clicking when you drag your mouse really quickly to do so if you want to be good.
Main reason why I'm wondering about this is because Day9 stressed mouse accuracy in one of his dailies, where he also mentioned to click on individual things rather than box them. He said that a remedy is to just adjust your mouse so you're comfortable, but I don't really think that helps you actually get fast drag-click accuracy because the distance always varies - there's a natural distance for your hand to drag if you go really quickly, and it's very hard to control.
You probably have mouse acceleration on. I'm pretty drunk right now, but if it's on then you definitely need to turn it off. Google turning off mouse acceleration. Essentially you want your mouse movements to be "linear" so that any combination of wrist movements in any order will produce the same outcome. So if you do a left, right, and up movement of same distance and speed, but then do left, right, and up, twice as fast, you should end up in the same spot. with acceleration, since it's dependannt on velocity, you can end up in vastly different spots. with acceleration off, you can develop "muscle memory" with your mouse settings and resolution.
- You used a 11/11 strategy in the 3rd set. On certain maps, when the terran player has good control, the 11/11 strategy can be a nightmare for zerg players to hold. I feel like I can win 95% of those games. When I use them against my teammates they get mad at me, so I only use them on the ladder against random people.
On June 11 2011 13:42 HolyArrow wrote: How important is mouse accuracy in being good at SC2? Obviously if I take my time I can click accurately with ease, but if I try to move really quickly, I VERY rarely land on where I want. For example, I positioned a probe on the lower left area of my screen and another one on the upper right part of my screen, and when I tried to go from lower left to upper right and click on the probe there, I kept missing over and over - needless to say, my wrist felt kind of funny because I was putting too much effort into being accurate, and it was pretty irritating. If I go a bit more slowly it's much easier, but I'm just wondering how important it is to have really accurate clicking when you drag your mouse really quickly to do so if you want to be good.
Main reason why I'm wondering about this is because Day9 stressed mouse accuracy in one of his dailies, where he also mentioned to click on individual things rather than box them. He said that a remedy is to just adjust your mouse so you're comfortable, but I don't really think that helps you actually get fast drag-click accuracy because the distance always varies - there's a natural distance for your hand to drag if you go really quickly, and it's very hard to control.
You probably have mouse acceleration on. I'm pretty drunk right now, but if it's on then you definitely need to turn it off. Google turning off mouse acceleration. Essentially you want your mouse movements to be "linear" so that any combination of wrist movements in any order will produce the same outcome. So if you do a left, right, and up movement of same distance and speed, but then do left, right, and up, twice as fast, you should end up in the same spot. with acceleration, since it's dependannt on velocity, you can end up in vastly different spots. with acceleration off, you can develop "muscle memory" with your mouse settings and resolution.
I'm pretty sure I don't have mouse acceleration on, thanks for the suggestion though. Maybe I just really suck at mouse control... LOL
On June 11 2011 02:56 nathangonmad wrote: Why don't Raven Hunter Seeker missles see use to target down Sentries?
Nice point, sentries are quite slow they shouldn't be able to outrun them easily.
Also, forcing sentries back would allow MMM to get closer.....
Ghosts do the same job job for a cheaper price while at a longer range. To get HSM, you need the HSM tech, Corvid reactor tech, lots of time, and some ravens. This all more expensive AND less effective than a ghost casting EMP.
Fair point, then how come it isn't used against Banelings? I know Tanks do that job, but they can still roll 50 banelings into tank lines and kill it sometimes. Only thing you can do to a seeker missile is running away.
That's an excellent question. You could say we don't have the dedication or the infrastructure (Team Houses) but I don't think either are really true. For some reason NA is always a little behind Europe and very behind Korea. Though I don't accept any of the widely used arguments as to why the NA pros fair worst, I certainly agree that Koreans earn their top position with their incredible amount of practice and dedication to the game.
I posted about this earlier but has anyone else noticed the team colors screwing up in game? Sometimes when I play or watch a replay my minimap colors will be different from the colors on the buildings and units. The other night I was watching Minigun's stream, and he was green on the minimap and red on the main screen.
I know you can switch the colors of the units based on yours, allies, and enemies, but doesn't that also change the color of the units and structures? I thought it was just my computer doing it, but now I've noticed it on a stream, my PC, and another PC. I just saw someone playing the game where their minimap showed them as green, and they were red in game...
I'm so confused x_x
edit: lol I am stupid, apparently you're always green in matches ;p
- You used a 11/11 strategy in the 3rd set. On certain maps, when the terran player has good control, the 11/11 strategy can be a nightmare for zerg players to hold. I feel like I can win 95% of those games. When I use them against my teammates they get mad at me, so I only use them on the ladder against random people.
After MMA won the last MLG, I see that a lot of terrans are becoming way better at double dropping against zerg. Me being a zerg player at high diamond level am the obvious victom of this! Is there any correct way to deal with mass drops throughout the game? Is large muta flocks the way to deal with this?
Banelings can't deal this very well since terran just picks them up and infestors don't seem to have enough energy to constantly kill clumps of marines with 2x fungals.
Since I switched from protoss to zerg (I'm at pretty much the same level with both races) I noticed that my average APM while playing protoss was between 60-100 and while playing zerg it's between 120-160. I don't really spam click with the purpose of getting APM so it's just something coming with the race I guess.
A fun fact that I noticed: Mutalisks' bouncing attack actually bounces to critters.
On June 11 2011 17:28 xerus wrote: I posted about this earlier but has anyone else noticed the team colors screwing up in game? Sometimes when I play or watch a replay my minimap colors will be different from the colors on the buildings and units. The other night I was watching Minigun's stream, and he was green on the minimap and red on the main screen.
I know you can switch the colors of the units based on yours, allies, and enemies, but doesn't that also change the color of the units and structures? I thought it was just my computer doing it, but now I've noticed it on a stream, my PC, and another PC. I just saw someone playing the game where their minimap showed them as green, and they were red in game...
I'm so confused x_x
It will always show you as green on the minimap regardless of what color you actually are in the game.
I just found out that when I am drunk I can play a 35 minute TvZ without remembering to put a single SCV on gas and still win. My marine splitting is bloody awesome when you can't keep the aim steady.
I've been inactive for a while. Where can I go to find valid BO's? In PvZ I've gotten problem with the old 3gatesentry expand... In PvT I've no idea what to do. Ye, I play Protoss and in Diamond league
On June 12 2011 00:48 Pochtli wrote: Since I switched from protoss to zerg (I'm at pretty much the same level with both races) I noticed that my average APM while playing protoss was between 60-100 and while playing zerg it's between 120-160. I don't really spam click with the purpose of getting APM so it's just something coming with the race I guess.
If you played zerg with 60 apm I don't think you could actually manage more than two bases and a 1a army. You gotta move faster as zerg to survive.
On June 12 2011 00:48 Pochtli wrote: Since I switched from protoss to zerg (I'm at pretty much the same level with both races) I noticed that my average APM while playing protoss was between 60-100 and while playing zerg it's between 120-160. I don't really spam click with the purpose of getting APM so it's just something coming with the race I guess.
If you played zerg with 60 apm I don't think you could actually manage more than two bases and a 1a army. You gotta move faster as zerg to survive.
Exact same thing happened to me when I switched from toss to zerg. I think it might have something to do with larva injects, and the fact that I can't keep my whole army on one hotkey anymore.
What should I be feeling/thinking when I lose to an all-in or cheese build?
I generally try to FE in all matchups (playing Terran), and sometimes some cheese just gets me. And then I watch the replay, and I notice that I could have held it off, but lost it due to stupid micro/decision mistakes (not pulling scvs, not focusing down a void ray, not stutter step microing etc..)
I don't know what to feel about these losses. I try to play as safe as possible, but some cheese just gets me. Should I be feeling like I'm a horrible player, or that I can't hold some cheese off or do stupid mistakes?
Should I let these losses damage my confidence as a player?
^no, just use them to learn. say you dont do something and you coulda held it off. Just say, okay next time he does X cheese, i will do Y, and i will win!
Losing in a learning process, not something to be upset by, or lose confidence in yourself. You should be happy when you lose, because now you have something to work on next game, and you learnt something about what your build is weak against, or what you need to work on as a player
An important distinction to make for yourself is "Did I lose to cheese or did my opponent scout my early expansion and capitalize on my greedy play?" I'm in denial after some games when I'm pylon walled or bunker rushed and mentally (or extremely vocally on skype) refer to it as cheese but in my heart I know it's being outplayed by aggression when I'm greedy.
On June 12 2011 14:54 Drygioni wrote: Exact same thing happened to me when I switched from toss to zerg. I think it might have something to do with larva injects, and the fact that I can't keep my whole army on one hotkey anymore.
I'm not sure if you're poking fun at my statement or actually saying that.
You simply can't stop using your queens if you expect to win as zerg. It doesn't matter if you're in a damn fight with colossii and void rays, you're going to have to shift que or fall back a few bits to inject or you sure as hell won't have the ability to remax if things don't go phenomenally well for you.
But no, the real apm sink I feel as a Zerg player is constantly having a force harassing and slowing a push while simultaneously keeping up base management through creep spread, injects and teching/solidifying defenses WHILE setting up an ambush (burrowed banes/roaches or simply hiding in the FOW to snipe rear units and sandwich an army).. The reality though is that Protoss can be played beautifully with warp prism drops, sneak/diversion attacks and other high apm stratagems and a lot of the argument is just bitching and moaning. Saviour played with a low APM until had bursts of activity and I will not question it is possible to play with a minimal amount of APM as zerg. But the final word is you have to have a certain (very achievable) APM to play at the Gold+ level.
The real story will always be not about how high your actions per minute are but what actions you're doing.
I hope that was a joke. I'm going to quietly simmer and rage at you for being able to play with your army on one hotkey >,<
On June 12 2011 17:19 L3g3nd_ wrote: Why does every ladder zerg do some variation of a 2 base all in?
I'd complain about half the time I vs T/P on the ladder they wall off my ramp or do some other 1/2 base all in (Which is pretty damn accurate) but I'd just be hiding the fact that half the zvz's I play involve 1 base strategies (My favorite being I'm going to make 15 spinecrawlers and 700 mutas wanna play?, closely followed by I'll make pure lings until it works or I quit. 6 pool double spinecrawler on your creep is just so last year)
Its good to remember the weekend on the ladder is ALL IN ALL NIGHT BABY!
In one of the recent dailies, Day[9] mentioned some program that makes switching replays easy. I thought he said Sc2 Switcher, but I've searched and the only thing I find is an old region switcher from the beta.
On June 13 2011 01:16 NexUmbra wrote: What race do you guys think is the easiest to play?
I think Protoss is the least APM intensive, and the warp gates make armies really easy to control/make/reinforce. Their macro mechanic is also the easiest, since it can be used at any time and on any production building. However, I think Protoss can also be very difficult to be creative with, so low APM doesn't bother me very much.
Just an idea, how would Siege Tank turtle into Battlecruiser be in TvP? It feels like Bio play is just too weak for any long term play.
I'm thinking some sort of Ghost-Mech to hold out and punish protos a bit, gain ground on the map with Siege Tanks, some BF helions and Ghosts for EMP, and ultimately, having a big battlecruiser fleet.
Is it possible theoretically? I'm looking for some sort of a long term focus strategy on transitioning between tech trees, while holding out an expanding. Sort of how Zerg gradually gets to Broodlord tech v. Protoss.
On June 13 2011 03:03 Pochtli wrote: So much SC2 to watch:
How to decide?
1. Hire three people to watch 2 events each and then feed you the choiciest bits ... 2. Put all the names on a piece of paper, put it on the wall and then throw a dart / spit a chewing gum at it ... 3. Roll a die (hint: visit your local roleplaying game shop for a d20) ...
So the game has been out for almost a year now but I still think zergling unit size or pathing or whatever is ridiculous. It's stupid how hard they are to block out sometimes. Sometimes there is no way my wall isn't a complete wall and the zerglings run through my zealot, and i mean literally right through my zealot. Anyone else have this from time to time?
On June 13 2011 15:33 travis wrote: So the game has been out for almost a year now but I still think zergling unit sie or pathing or whatever is ridiculous. It's stupid how hard they are to block out sometimes. Sometimes there is no way my wall isn't a complete wall and the zerglings run through my zealot, and i mean literally right through my zealot. Anyone else have this from time to time?
What annoys me the most bout the zerglings is that they require 0 micro to take out scouting probes. You just place them wherever on the map, if it spots a probe itll chase and kill it completely by itself, given it has the speed upgrade. The result of this is YOU HAVE TO get observers out or push to get some scouting done, and pushing can be dangerous considering you dont know wether the zerg has been massing units all along or pushing drones.
This problem is bigger than most ppl think. In BW it was atleast possible to get some scouting done early/mid game with probes etc. Now im constantly kept in the dark, especially with xel naga towers making it easier to spot my probe. I dont like the fact that every PvZ has to feel like somewhat of a gamble.
On June 13 2011 15:33 travis wrote: So the game has been out for almost a year now but I still think zergling unit sie or pathing or whatever is ridiculous. It's stupid how hard they are to block out sometimes. Sometimes there is no way my wall isn't a complete wall and the zerglings run through my zealot, and i mean literally right through my zealot. Anyone else have this from time to time?
What annoys me the most bout the zerglings is that they require 0 micro to take out scouting probes. You just place them wherever on the map, if it spots a probe itll chase and kill it completely by itself, given it has the speed upgrade. The result of this is YOU HAVE TO get observers out or push to get some scouting done, and pushing can be dangerous considering you dont know wether the zerg has been massing units all along or pushing drones.
This problem is bigger than most ppl think. In BW it was atleast possible to get some scouting done early/mid game with probes etc. Now im constantly kept in the dark, especially with xel naga towers making it easier to spot my probe. I dont like the fact that every PvZ has to feel like somewhat of a gamble.
Am i the only one who thinks this way?
I think PvZ is a fragile matchup for both players at the moment, and this is one of the reasons why.
Just wondering but wasn't Cella told to not ask for money while he streamed? I vaguely remember that from a few months back but I noticed Sterling is asking for money quite often tonight on stream asking for "50 cents" and talking about generous doners he's had. Not trying to start anything but I was just wondering if this was appropriate since hes featured? Again plz don't take that the wrong way, I don't agree with him doing it but I was just trying to see what anyone else thought.
Its an unaddressed bug travis. a zergling can push the one in front of it past the zealot. its hard to do on purpose but its possible. You could always just make two zealots.
On June 13 2011 15:33 travis wrote: So the game has been out for almost a year now but I still think zergling unit size or pathing or whatever is ridiculous. It's stupid how hard they are to block out sometimes. Sometimes there is no way my wall isn't a complete wall and the zerglings run through my zealot, and i mean literally right through my zealot. Anyone else have this from time to time?
It's your mistake only. You can always wall off 1 square with zealot to prevent lings running by. Post a replay if you think otherwise.
Just an idea, how would Siege Tank turtle into Battlecruiser be in TvP? It feels like Bio play is just too weak for any long term play.
Marauder/Medivac/Viking/Ghost is the sickest endgame TvP composition you can get (unlike Mech it's extremly hard to counter for P). Mass vikings, they are more food efficient than marines even while in ground mode and they are superior to anything but mass phenix in air. And marauders... i don't think it need's a comment.
Whats up with 2gate proxy zealot rush in PvP. I cant block that with 2 gate stalkers and probe micro (if that even exists) ?
1 zealot goes into my mineral line and the other chases my stalkers, so what do i do? I sorround the zealot in my mineral line with my probes to kill it, use move attack with my stalker on the zealot chasing it and after some time when he keeps sending more and more zealots by the end of it i have no probes left. What am i doing wrong? This should totally be doable. Am i suppose to pull all my probes away from the mineral line? Am i forced to put down a forge and cannon just to block it?
Assuming i went 1 gate core in the beginning. This should really come down to a micro situation, but it doesnt. If the opponent knows what he is doing and where to place those zealots ur fucked.
I know Raven's Seeker Missile gets a lot of hate, but in TvP, couldn't you theoretically SM, say, 1-2 sentries and a collosi or two? I feel if you SM multiple units in the protoss 'death ball' during a heated fight, it's simply infeasible for the protoss to micro those units away. Possibly find some way with EMP to enhance the effect (EMP + SM = obliterated deathball?), or using autoturrets to wall off/funnel protoss units, or even SMing a cloaked ghost sitting in the middle of their death ball.
This would require some flanking/positioning, but I feel the potential is there for Seeker Missile to deal significant damage to the protoss deathball.
On June 13 2011 20:28 ICanFlyLow wrote: Whats up with 2gate proxy zealot rush in PvP. I cant block that with 2 gate stalkers and probe micro (if that even exists) ?
1 zealot goes into my mineral line and the other chases my stalkers, so what do i do? I sorround the zealot in my mineral line with my probes to kill it, use move attack with my stalker on the zealot chasing it and after some time when he keeps sending more and more zealots by the end of it i have no probes left. What am i doing wrong? This should totally be doable. Am i suppose to pull all my probes away from the mineral line? Am i forced to put down a forge and cannon just to block it?
Assuming i went 1 gate core in the beginning. This should really come down to a micro situation, but it doesnt. If the opponent knows what he is doing and where to place those zealots ur fucked.
Solution: Buff workers.
Yes, wall with cannon(s) behind if you can do it in time will be your best bet and you will end up far ahead. Cut probes the moment you scout it to put down the forge and wall asap.
Disclaimer: I do not play Terran
I know Raven's Seeker Missile gets a lot of hate, but in TvP, couldn't you theoretically SM, say, 1-2 sentries and a collosi or two? I feel if you SM multiple units in the protoss 'death ball' during a heated fight, it's simply infeasible for the protoss to micro those units away. Possibly find some way with EMP to enhance the effect (EMP + SM = obliterated deathball?), or using autoturrets to wall off/funnel protoss units, or even SMing a cloaked ghost sitting in the middle of their death ball.
This would require some flanking/positioning, but I feel the potential is there for Seeker Missile to deal significant damage to the protoss deathball.
Most terrans are not smart enaugh to use raven outside of 1 base all-in, but in end game multiple PDD's are stronger than HighSchoolMusical because if you go vikings he need's stalkers or phenixes.
On June 13 2011 20:28 ICanFlyLow wrote: Whats up with 2gate proxy zealot rush in PvP. I cant block that with 2 gate stalkers and probe micro (if that even exists) ?
1 zealot goes into my mineral line and the other chases my stalkers, so what do i do? I sorround the zealot in my mineral line with my probes to kill it, use move attack with my stalker on the zealot chasing it and after some time when he keeps sending more and more zealots by the end of it i have no probes left. What am i doing wrong? This should totally be doable. Am i suppose to pull all my probes away from the mineral line? Am i forced to put down a forge and cannon just to block it?
Assuming i went 1 gate core in the beginning. This should really come down to a micro situation, but it doesnt. If the opponent knows what he is doing and where to place those zealots ur fucked.
Solution: Buff workers.
Yes, wall with cannon(s) behind if you can do it in time will be your best bet and you will end up far ahead. Cut probes the moment you scout it to put down the forge and wall asap.
I know Raven's Seeker Missile gets a lot of hate, but in TvP, couldn't you theoretically SM, say, 1-2 sentries and a collosi or two? I feel if you SM multiple units in the protoss 'death ball' during a heated fight, it's simply infeasible for the protoss to micro those units away. Possibly find some way with EMP to enhance the effect (EMP + SM = obliterated deathball?), or using autoturrets to wall off/funnel protoss units, or even SMing a cloaked ghost sitting in the middle of their death ball.
This would require some flanking/positioning, but I feel the potential is there for Seeker Missile to deal significant damage to the protoss deathball.
Most terrans are not smart enaugh to use raven outside of 1 base all-in, but in end game multiple PDD's are stronger than HighSchoolMusical because if you go vikings he need's stalkers or phenixes.
Im not trying to bash the game, but this is exactly what makes it fucking boring.
On June 13 2011 20:28 ICanFlyLow wrote: Whats up with 2gate proxy zealot rush in PvP. I cant block that with 2 gate stalkers and probe micro (if that even exists) ?
1 zealot goes into my mineral line and the other chases my stalkers, so what do i do? I sorround the zealot in my mineral line with my probes to kill it, use move attack with my stalker on the zealot chasing it and after some time when he keeps sending more and more zealots by the end of it i have no probes left. What am i doing wrong? This should totally be doable. Am i suppose to pull all my probes away from the mineral line? Am i forced to put down a forge and cannon just to block it?
Assuming i went 1 gate core in the beginning. This should really come down to a micro situation, but it doesnt. If the opponent knows what he is doing and where to place those zealots ur fucked.
Solution: Buff workers.
Yes, wall with cannon(s) behind if you can do it in time will be your best bet and you will end up far ahead. Cut probes the moment you scout it to put down the forge and wall asap.
Disclaimer: I do not play Terran
I know Raven's Seeker Missile gets a lot of hate, but in TvP, couldn't you theoretically SM, say, 1-2 sentries and a collosi or two? I feel if you SM multiple units in the protoss 'death ball' during a heated fight, it's simply infeasible for the protoss to micro those units away. Possibly find some way with EMP to enhance the effect (EMP + SM = obliterated deathball?), or using autoturrets to wall off/funnel protoss units, or even SMing a cloaked ghost sitting in the middle of their death ball.
This would require some flanking/positioning, but I feel the potential is there for Seeker Missile to deal significant damage to the protoss deathball.
Most terrans are not smart enaugh to use raven outside of 1 base all-in, but in end game multiple PDD's are stronger than HighSchoolMusical because if you go vikings he need's stalkers or phenixes.
Im not trying to bash the game, but this is exactly what makes it fucking boring.
Not sure i fallow, you want to beat a cheese strategy without any effort or change to your build, and win seasly after that? Also why are you playing a boring game ^^
On June 13 2011 20:28 ICanFlyLow wrote: Whats up with 2gate proxy zealot rush in PvP. I cant block that with 2 gate stalkers and probe micro (if that even exists) ?
1 zealot goes into my mineral line and the other chases my stalkers, so what do i do? I sorround the zealot in my mineral line with my probes to kill it, use move attack with my stalker on the zealot chasing it and after some time when he keeps sending more and more zealots by the end of it i have no probes left. What am i doing wrong? This should totally be doable. Am i suppose to pull all my probes away from the mineral line? Am i forced to put down a forge and cannon just to block it?
Assuming i went 1 gate core in the beginning. This should really come down to a micro situation, but it doesnt. If the opponent knows what he is doing and where to place those zealots ur fucked.
Solution: Buff workers.
Yes, wall with cannon(s) behind if you can do it in time will be your best bet and you will end up far ahead. Cut probes the moment you scout it to put down the forge and wall asap.
Disclaimer: I do not play Terran
I know Raven's Seeker Missile gets a lot of hate, but in TvP, couldn't you theoretically SM, say, 1-2 sentries and a collosi or two? I feel if you SM multiple units in the protoss 'death ball' during a heated fight, it's simply infeasible for the protoss to micro those units away. Possibly find some way with EMP to enhance the effect (EMP + SM = obliterated deathball?), or using autoturrets to wall off/funnel protoss units, or even SMing a cloaked ghost sitting in the middle of their death ball.
This would require some flanking/positioning, but I feel the potential is there for Seeker Missile to deal significant damage to the protoss deathball.
Most terrans are not smart enaugh to use raven outside of 1 base all-in, but in end game multiple PDD's are stronger than HighSchoolMusical because if you go vikings he need's stalkers or phenixes.
Im not trying to bash the game, but this is exactly what makes it fucking boring.
Not sure i fallow, you want to beat a cheese strategy without any effort or change to your build, and win seasly after that? Also why are you playing a boring game ^^
Micro is an exciting and skill based feature. Not to freaking wall yourself in with cannons.
On June 10 2011 17:21 Complete wrote: I've noticed from watching streams/replays that tosses in their wallin always put the gateway tugging the wall so it doesnt have the zealot by it. It can't be a coincidence that pretty much all of them do this - but I don't know why. Could somebody enlighten me (I realize it is a bit of a tiny detail in the grand scheme of things)?
You mean instead of placing the Cybernetics Core next to the wall? I think this is since the gateway goes down first and it is easier to fit it correclty this way. Otherwise the first building would be placed without touching any sides and this would make it easier to mess up. This would be my guess anyway.
On June 13 2011 20:28 ICanFlyLow wrote: Whats up with 2gate proxy zealot rush in PvP. I cant block that with 2 gate stalkers and probe micro (if that even exists) ?
1 zealot goes into my mineral line and the other chases my stalkers, so what do i do? I sorround the zealot in my mineral line with my probes to kill it, use move attack with my stalker on the zealot chasing it and after some time when he keeps sending more and more zealots by the end of it i have no probes left. What am i doing wrong? This should totally be doable. Am i suppose to pull all my probes away from the mineral line? Am i forced to put down a forge and cannon just to block it?
Assuming i went 1 gate core in the beginning. This should really come down to a micro situation, but it doesnt. If the opponent knows what he is doing and where to place those zealots ur fucked.
Solution: Buff workers.
Yes, wall with cannon(s) behind if you can do it in time will be your best bet and you will end up far ahead. Cut probes the moment you scout it to put down the forge and wall asap.
Disclaimer: I do not play Terran
I know Raven's Seeker Missile gets a lot of hate, but in TvP, couldn't you theoretically SM, say, 1-2 sentries and a collosi or two? I feel if you SM multiple units in the protoss 'death ball' during a heated fight, it's simply infeasible for the protoss to micro those units away. Possibly find some way with EMP to enhance the effect (EMP + SM = obliterated deathball?), or using autoturrets to wall off/funnel protoss units, or even SMing a cloaked ghost sitting in the middle of their death ball.
This would require some flanking/positioning, but I feel the potential is there for Seeker Missile to deal significant damage to the protoss deathball.
Most terrans are not smart enaugh to use raven outside of 1 base all-in, but in end game multiple PDD's are stronger than HighSchoolMusical because if you go vikings he need's stalkers or phenixes.
Im not trying to bash the game, but this is exactly what makes it fucking boring.
Not sure i fallow, you want to beat a cheese strategy without any effort or change to your build, and win seasly after that? Also why are you playing a boring game ^^
Micro is an exciting and skill based feature. Not to freaking wall yourself in with cannons.
"Exciting" is very subjective, and if exciting isn't always the best strategy in the strategy game it's because it's real time freaking strategy game.
How do coaching sessions work? I've seen that they can be bought at money/hour (what a waste of money imo), but what happens? Do you play vs your coach? Does your coach watch you play and then gives advice, or gives advice during the game? Or does teh coach play for you and explain you shit?
On June 13 2011 23:19 Incognoto wrote: How do coaching sessions work? I've seen that they can be bought at money/hour (what a waste of money imo), but what happens? Do you play vs your coach? Does your coach watch you play and then gives advice, or gives advice during the game? Or does teh coach play for you and explain you shit?
You can usually tell your coach to do whatever you want.
On June 13 2011 20:28 ICanFlyLow wrote: Whats up with 2gate proxy zealot rush in PvP. I cant block that with 2 gate stalkers and probe micro (if that even exists) ?
1 zealot goes into my mineral line and the other chases my stalkers, so what do i do? I sorround the zealot in my mineral line with my probes to kill it, use move attack with my stalker on the zealot chasing it and after some time when he keeps sending more and more zealots by the end of it i have no probes left. What am i doing wrong? This should totally be doable. Am i suppose to pull all my probes away from the mineral line? Am i forced to put down a forge and cannon just to block it?
Assuming i went 1 gate core in the beginning. This should really come down to a micro situation, but it doesnt. If the opponent knows what he is doing and where to place those zealots ur fucked.
Solution: Buff workers.
Yes, wall with cannon(s) behind if you can do it in time will be your best bet and you will end up far ahead. Cut probes the moment you scout it to put down the forge and wall asap.
Disclaimer: I do not play Terran
I know Raven's Seeker Missile gets a lot of hate, but in TvP, couldn't you theoretically SM, say, 1-2 sentries and a collosi or two? I feel if you SM multiple units in the protoss 'death ball' during a heated fight, it's simply infeasible for the protoss to micro those units away. Possibly find some way with EMP to enhance the effect (EMP + SM = obliterated deathball?), or using autoturrets to wall off/funnel protoss units, or even SMing a cloaked ghost sitting in the middle of their death ball.
This would require some flanking/positioning, but I feel the potential is there for Seeker Missile to deal significant damage to the protoss deathball.
Most terrans are not smart enaugh to use raven outside of 1 base all-in, but in end game multiple PDD's are stronger than HighSchoolMusical because if you go vikings he need's stalkers or phenixes.
Im not trying to bash the game, but this is exactly what makes it fucking boring.
Not sure i fallow, you want to beat a cheese strategy without any effort or change to your build, and win seasly after that? Also why are you playing a boring game ^^
Micro is an exciting and skill based feature. Not to freaking wall yourself in with cannons.
Strategy is also an exciting and skill based feature.
On June 13 2011 23:19 Incognoto wrote: How do coaching sessions work? I've seen that they can be bought at money/hour (what a waste of money imo), but what happens? Do you play vs your coach? Does your coach watch you play and then gives advice, or gives advice during the game? Or does teh coach play for you and explain you shit?
First off, it depends completely on the coach. There isn't some organized union or standards for coaching, so depending on who you choose YMMV.
I don't coach SC2, but I do tutor, the basic structure I follow is: -Pre-tutoring session, ask them to write a couple sentences on what they're struggling on (IE, 'I lose to 2 rax all the time) -**If I were coaching SC2, I'd ask them to send me some replays of their play so I can judge their overall skill level -At the tutoring session, I'd review whatever attempts they made (In this case, watch sc2 replay with them), pointing out what mistakes were made here and there. A good coach explain the rationale behind doing X instead of Y, as well as letting the person they're coaching try to figure it out themselves (IE 'So we see only marines here. What does that tell us? Why?) -I would give them example problems to work on. In the case of SC2, I'd get another person of equal-skill level to play against them in a handful of matches, obsing the game from their POV and offering help along the way. -Post-games I would review the replay with them. -Repeat until time is up, answering any questions they have along the way.
There are many different techniques for teaching, and some people could be great players but poor coaches, so really if you are interested in coaching contact them directly and ask what their method is. Or watch their stream, they sometimes coach over stream.
On June 13 2011 20:28 ICanFlyLow wrote: Whats up with 2gate proxy zealot rush in PvP. I cant block that with 2 gate stalkers and probe micro (if that even exists) ?
1 zealot goes into my mineral line and the other chases my stalkers, so what do i do? I sorround the zealot in my mineral line with my probes to kill it, use move attack with my stalker on the zealot chasing it and after some time when he keeps sending more and more zealots by the end of it i have no probes left. What am i doing wrong? This should totally be doable. Am i suppose to pull all my probes away from the mineral line? Am i forced to put down a forge and cannon just to block it?
Assuming i went 1 gate core in the beginning. This should really come down to a micro situation, but it doesnt. If the opponent knows what he is doing and where to place those zealots ur fucked.
Solution: Buff workers.
dont listen to the guy who said forge, thats a terrible idea. you need to scout for it. send a probe around all the places he might proxy, then if you find it, get a 2nd gate and go zealot. with some micro and good chrono timing you wont even need to pull probes.
I've never heard anyone say: If someone 6 pools you 6 pool them If someone scv marine all ins SCV MARINE ALL IN!!!1! If someone cannon cheeses you make many cannons in and around their base for ezpz win
The hell kind of... If they proxy 2 gate you.. you proxy 2 gate at home?
Yeah micro battle, got it. But wouldn't it be wiser to just build a cannon?
how will blizzard release the HOTS beta, and under what conditions, what will i have to do to get my hands on a beta, i will do it whatever it takes, pls someone that participated in the WOL beta let me know sorta how it worked?
I seem to have hit a point where I face people with a clearly more refined play than me (still only diamond though, so pretty low level). This had led me to think that I need to get some solid BO practise done lest I suffer more silly losses that could've been avoided by having banelings out 10 seconds earlier. My question:
How strict are Z BOs a few minutes into a game? So far (which has obviously been a detrimental thought process) I usually have everything planned out until like 25 supply, upon which I try to react to what the opponent does and get things "as soon as I think I can get away with it" while following patterns based on previous games. What kind of mindset do you better players have regarding BOs?
On June 14 2011 20:33 Probe1 wrote: I've never heard anyone say: If someone 6 pools you 6 pool them If someone scv marine all ins SCV MARINE ALL IN!!!1! If someone cannon cheeses you make many cannons in and around their base for ezpz win
The hell kind of... If they proxy 2 gate you.. you proxy 2 gate at home?
Yeah micro battle, got it. But wouldn't it be wiser to just build a cannon?
a cannon is a stationary unit, you want to avoid "towers" when possible, they are okay in a PvZ situation where it secures you a 2nd base very quickly, or for rushing someone and having them there, but as soon as you build defensive cannons, a good opponent is going to know you arent putting any pressure on them for a long time, and they can cut corners. So cannons will stop the immediate proxy pressure, but you will lose to his superior tech, or superior macro.
Though if hes a bad player (i don't know what league you are) he might just attack into cannons and give you the win, but theoretically with good player vs good player, the cannoning player will lose.
On June 13 2011 15:33 travis wrote: So the game has been out for almost a year now but I still think zergling unit size or pathing or whatever is ridiculous. It's stupid how hard they are to block out sometimes. Sometimes there is no way my wall isn't a complete wall and the zerglings run through my zealot, and i mean literally right through my zealot. Anyone else have this from time to time?
Yes happened in my last match, I couldn't believe it and after watching my replay concluded that there was no way that the zerglings should have gotten into my base
I seem to have hit a Point where I face people with a clearly more refined play than me (still Only diamond though, so pretty low level). This had led me to think that I need to get some Solid BO practise done lest I suffer more silly losses that could've been avoided by having banelings out 10 seconds earlier. My question:
How strict are Z BOs a few minutes Into a game? So far (Which has obviously been a detrimental thought process) I usually have everything planned out until like 25 supply, upon Which I try to react to what the opponent does and get things "as soon as I think I can get away with it" while following patterns based on previous games. What kind of mindset do you better players have regarding BOs?
I'm a bronzie but I watch a ton of Day[9] stuff, and it sounds like you're not expanding if you're getting stuck at 25 supply. I play the Zerg pieces myself, and it's very important to stay one base ahead of your opponent. If you watch proZergs and if they're playing the macro game then all you really see is drones and queens up until around 40 supply.I would also recommend really paying attention to your larva injects. Missing one early in the game can seriously affect your mid/late game. I would also say keep sending those scouts, if you've got a zergling right in front of his base you'll see him push out and you can then prepare by cranking out some units and maybe a spine or two. Pretty generic advice but stuff you still have to keep on top of. If you posted a replay I'm sure someone could explain exactly what you should be working on.
On June 13 2011 20:28 ICanFlyLow wrote: Whats up with 2gate proxy zealot rush in PvP. I cant block that with 2 gate stalkers and probe micro (if that even exists) ?
1 zealot goes into my mineral line and the other chases my stalkers, so what do i do? I sorround the zealot in my mineral line with my probes to kill it, use move attack with my stalker on the zealot chasing it and after some time when he keeps sending more and more zealots by the end of it i have no probes left. What am i doing wrong? This should totally be doable. Am i suppose to pull all my probes away from the mineral line? Am i forced to put down a forge and cannon just to block it?
Assuming i went 1 gate core in the beginning. This should really come down to a micro situation, but it doesnt. If the opponent knows what he is doing and where to place those zealots ur fucked.
Solution: Buff workers.
Yes, wall with cannon(s) behind if you can do it in time will be your best bet and you will end up far ahead. Cut probes the moment you scout it to put down the forge and wall asap.
Disclaimer: I do not play Terran
I know Raven's Seeker Missile gets a lot of hate, but in TvP, couldn't you theoretically SM, say, 1-2 sentries and a collosi or two? I feel if you SM multiple units in the protoss 'death ball' during a heated fight, it's simply infeasible for the protoss to micro those units away. Possibly find some way with EMP to enhance the effect (EMP + SM = obliterated deathball?), or using autoturrets to wall off/funnel protoss units, or even SMing a cloaked ghost sitting in the middle of their death ball.
This would require some flanking/positioning, but I feel the potential is there for Seeker Missile to deal significant damage to the protoss deathball.
Most terrans are not smart enaugh to use raven outside of 1 base all-in, but in end game multiple PDD's are stronger than HighSchoolMusical because if you go vikings he need's stalkers or phenixes.
Im not trying to bash the game, but this is exactly what makes it fucking boring.
Not sure i fallow, you want to beat a cheese strategy without any effort or change to your build, and win seasly after that? Also why are you playing a boring game ^^
Micro is an exciting and skill based feature. Not to freaking wall yourself in with cannons.
MKP held an IN-BASE proxy 2gate with a 1rax cc opener, so don't act like there's no micro in this game. I think that it is feasable to hold proxy 2gate zeal with 2gate stalker, you just maybe need better micro or to rethink how you'll micro. for example, maybe pull your probes back to your stalkers, and use them to buffer zeals so you can get more shots off instead of splitting up your stalkers and probes and letting him get more probe kills while lowering the overall dps of your forces. Also, with your 2nd gate, make a 1hex wall (ala PvZ) and use a zeal to block it if possible, if you scout the proxies early. that way he'll either have to burn down a gate while you have time to get stalkers, or he'll go 1v1 with your zeal.
I seem to have hit a Point where I face people with a clearly more refined play than me (still Only diamond though, so pretty low level). This had led me to think that I need to get some Solid BO practise done lest I suffer more silly losses that could've been avoided by having banelings out 10 seconds earlier. My question:
How strict are Z BOs a few minutes Into a game? So far (Which has obviously been a detrimental thought process) I usually have everything planned out until like 25 supply, upon Which I try to react to what the opponent does and get things "as soon as I think I can get away with it" while following patterns based on previous games. What kind of mindset do you better players have regarding BOs?
I'm a bronzie but I watch a ton of Day[9] stuff, and it sounds like you're not expanding if you're getting stuck at 25 supply. I play the Zerg pieces myself, and it's very important to stay one base ahead of your opponent. If you watch proZergs and if they're playing the macro game then all you really see is drones and queens up until around 40 supply.I would also recommend really paying attention to your larva injects. Missing one early in the game can seriously affect your mid/late game. I would also say keep sending those scouts, if you've got a zergling right in front of his base you'll see him push out and you can then prepare by cranking out some units and maybe a spine or two. Pretty generic advice but stuff you still have to keep on top of. If you posted a replay I'm sure someone could explain exactly what you should be working on.
While I appreciate the time you took to make that reply, I think my point didn't come across the way I wanted it to
I was wondering about how rigid other Z players' build orders are - as in if they have a basic plan down to the very supply count (or second) for their build, while of course allowing changes due to scouting/incoming harass etc.
Of course I don't neglect scouting/droning/expanding/mechanics - I'm thinking about the mindset on how to plan games.
Can someone explain how does one drop from master league to bronze in one day? He was in masters in may 30th but dropped to bronze in june 1st and he's now rank 1 bronze with over 3k wins. He's in masters league in 3v3 and 2v2 atm. How is it possible?
I'm assuming he lost a LOT of games before that one day and his MMR adjusted him on june first. I'd assume for portrait farming purposes. Maybe during late may when the ladders were locked he lost all the games and didn't get on until May 30th, a week after ladder unlock. Many explanations, most of them involve me assuming he was trying to portrait farm.
Jitensha I may only be a platinum Zerg but I find it impossible to have a rigid build order beyond the first 20 supply. I may go into the game thinking I want to hatch first, but I see a rax depot at the bottom of the ramp or forge first or its zvz. To be zerg is to be fluid with your decisions and rely upon reacting to your oppenent based on your experiences and plan than drone drone queen overlord drone baneling nest
It does have rigidity in certain ways though. If I see 2rax opening I want 100 gas for metabolic boost then I want no more until 5 minutes, I want to have 16 zerglings to keep his 2rax from crossing the map unbothered. But its.. idk, this should be answered by someone better than me.
Can someone explain how does one drop from master league to bronze in one day? He was in masters in may 30th but dropped to bronze in june 1st and he's now rank 1 bronze with over 3k wins. He's in masters league in 3v3 and 2v2 atm. How is it possible?
By instantly leaving every game. I've seen someone do this before, I don't really understand why they do it though. Maybe they want to start playing a new race in bronze again.
On June 13 2011 20:31 rust.oxide wrote: Disclaimer: I do not play Terran
I know Raven's Seeker Missile gets a lot of hate, but in TvP, couldn't you theoretically SM, say, 1-2 sentries and a collosi or two? I feel if you SM multiple units in the protoss 'death ball' during a heated fight, it's simply infeasible for the protoss to micro those units away. Possibly find some way with EMP to enhance the effect (EMP + SM = obliterated deathball?), or using autoturrets to wall off/funnel protoss units, or even SMing a cloaked ghost sitting in the middle of their death ball.
This would require some flanking/positioning, but I feel the potential is there for Seeker Missile to deal significant damage to the protoss deathball.
The problem with Seeker Missile is that it requires a moderately "close" range in order for it to be cast. In a normal Protoss vs Terran maxed supply armies, that would put the Raven just in front of the Marine/Marauder line, well in range of Voidrays and Stalkers.
You can possibly negate that by throwing in a point defense drone or two, but due to the energy costs, a single Raven cannot cast both a seeker missile (125) AND a point defense drone (100). So would have to expend additional resources for additional Ravens. At that point it would be better served to just invest in straight point defense drones (You can get 2 out of a max raven compared to just a single missile + 1 auto turret). Or to drop the Ravens and invest in more Vikings.
Logically also while the damage potential is huge for a clumped up deathball, your Raven is likely to be incapacitated well before it would be able to launch the missile.
Can someone explain how does one drop from master league to bronze in one day? He was in masters in may 30th but dropped to bronze in june 1st and he's now rank 1 bronze with over 3k wins. He's in masters league in 3v3 and 2v2 atm. How is it possible?
By instantly leaving every game. I've seen someone do this before, I don't really understand why they do it though. Maybe they want to start playing a new race in bronze again.
Usually it's so they can portrait farm, because it takes quite a long time to rack up 3k wins or so in masters league.
How do you fellow Protoss players deal with 1 base terrans spamming shit outta raxes? If i expand - he comes and kills me with marauders that can stim till they're at 10% hp but there is nothing left to kill them. If i tech, he kills me or i barely get 1-2 collo in time and hold while loosing it. Recently i've encountered terran that was on one base till 130 supply and came with mass marine/banshee with few tanks behind it and raven and GOOD LUCK scounting that when his surrounding himself with turrets behind wall on high ground... i mean how is this even possible that they can support all this shit. I seriously think that marines and marauders should cost more.
On June 15 2011 12:05 RM_12 wrote: How do you fellow Protoss players deal with 1 base terrans spamming shit outta raxes? If i expand - he comes and kills me with marauders that can stim till they're at 10% hp but there is nothing left to kill them. If i tech, he kills me or i barely get 1-2 collo in time and hold while loosing it. Recently i've encountered terran that was on one base till 130 supply and came with mass marine/banshee with few tanks behind it and raven and GOOD LUCK scounting that when his surrounding himself with turrets behind wall on high ground... i mean how is this even possible that they can support all this shit. I seriously think that marines and marauders should cost more.
The most terran can support off 1 base is four barracks. If he does this, you can always stay one base as well and hold your ramp with force fields while teching to colossus. Warp prism is also really nice if you see him camping the bottom of your ramp with his whole army. Just sneak into his base and warp in a bunch in a corner. Continue to hold your ramp with FF while destroying his main.
If you really want to get some useful help with PvT, you should try to make this a little more specific, link some replays of your games, and post it on the strategy forum.
I seem to have hit a Point where I face people with a clearly more refined play than me (still Only diamond though, so pretty low level). This had led me to think that I need to get some Solid BO practise done lest I suffer more silly losses that could've been avoided by having banelings out 10 seconds earlier. My question:
How strict are Z BOs a few minutes Into a game? So far (Which has obviously been a detrimental thought process) I usually have everything planned out until like 25 supply, upon Which I try to react to what the opponent does and get things "as soon as I think I can get away with it" while following patterns based on previous games. What kind of mindset do you better players have regarding BOs?
I'm a bronzie but I watch a ton of Day[9] stuff, and it sounds like you're not expanding if you're getting stuck at 25 supply. I play the Zerg pieces myself, and it's very important to stay one base ahead of your opponent. If you watch proZergs and if they're playing the macro game then all you really see is drones and queens up until around 40 supply.I would also recommend really paying attention to your larva injects. Missing one early in the game can seriously affect your mid/late game. I would also say keep sending those scouts, if you've got a zergling right in front of his base you'll see him push out and you can then prepare by cranking out some units and maybe a spine or two. Pretty generic advice but stuff you still have to keep on top of. If you posted a replay I'm sure someone could explain exactly what you should be working on.
While I appreciate the time you took to make that reply, I think my point didn't come across the way I wanted it to
I was wondering about how rigid other Z players' build orders are - as in if they have a basic plan down to the very supply count (or second) for their build, while of course allowing changes due to scouting/incoming harass etc.
Of course I don't neglect scouting/droning/expanding/mechanics - I'm thinking about the mindset on how to plan games.
I'm only high plat, but I don't think zerg macro build orders come that close. For example I always open 15 hatch 17 pool (Yes, very greedy zerg here). But sometimes I let my focus slip and miss it by 1 supply or so. Of course, this will make me miss ~50 minerals in later game, but it doesn't matter that much. Really zerg just depends on basic openers and responding after that.
I seem to have hit a Point where I face people with a clearly more refined play than me (still Only diamond though, so pretty low level). This had led me to think that I need to get some Solid BO practise done lest I suffer more silly losses that could've been avoided by having banelings out 10 seconds earlier. My question:
How strict are Z BOs a few minutes Into a game? So far (Which has obviously been a detrimental thought process) I usually have everything planned out until like 25 supply, upon Which I try to react to what the opponent does and get things "as soon as I think I can get away with it" while following patterns based on previous games. What kind of mindset do you better players have regarding BOs?
I'm a bronzie but I watch a ton of Day[9] stuff, and it sounds like you're not expanding if you're getting stuck at 25 supply. I play the Zerg pieces myself, and it's very important to stay one base ahead of your opponent. If you watch proZergs and if they're playing the macro game then all you really see is drones and queens up until around 40 supply.I would also recommend really paying attention to your larva injects. Missing one early in the game can seriously affect your mid/late game. I would also say keep sending those scouts, if you've got a zergling right in front of his base you'll see him push out and you can then prepare by cranking out some units and maybe a spine or two. Pretty generic advice but stuff you still have to keep on top of. If you posted a replay I'm sure someone could explain exactly what you should be working on.
I was wondering about how rigid other Z players' build orders are - as in if they have a basic plan down to the very supply count (or second) for their build, while of course allowing changes due to scouting/incoming harass etc.
Speaking of 'Rigid', I wonder where he went.. he used to stream all the time, and after MLG Dallas he kind of just... disappeared.
I'd assume an econ 4 gate doesn't stop probe production..
In other news, its nice to know that the leagues are still bugged. I was first in my platinum division for a week solid, going up against top 8 diamond and masters. It was a little disheartening and I kept telling myself I would be promoted when I deserved it. Nice to know it wasn't just me feeling left behind.
On June 14 2011 20:33 Probe1 wrote: I've never heard anyone say: If someone 6 pools you 6 pool them If someone scv marine all ins SCV MARINE ALL IN!!!1! If someone cannon cheeses you make many cannons in and around their base for ezpz win
The hell kind of... If they proxy 2 gate you.. you proxy 2 gate at home?
Yeah micro battle, got it. But wouldn't it be wiser to just build a cannon?
No because it's 300 minerals to build a single cannon and about 85 seconds... The other player can just hold back with the zealots, and work towards 4gating the cannoning player because if the cannon is not at the rim of your buildings, stalkers can pick off every building at range 6 until they just overpower you in whatever way they prefer.
On June 13 2011 15:33 travis wrote: So the game has been out for almost a year now but I still think zergling unit size or pathing or whatever is ridiculous. It's stupid how hard they are to block out sometimes. Sometimes there is no way my wall isn't a complete wall and the zerglings run through my zealot, and i mean literally right through my zealot. Anyone else have this from time to time?
Lemme guess... It's either Slag Pits or Typhon Peaks right?
On June 14 2011 20:33 Probe1 wrote: I've never heard anyone say: If someone 6 pools you 6 pool them If someone scv marine all ins SCV MARINE ALL IN!!!1! If someone cannon cheeses you make many cannons in and around their base for ezpz win
The hell kind of... If they proxy 2 gate you.. you proxy 2 gate at home?
Yeah micro battle, got it. But wouldn't it be wiser to just build a cannon?
No because it's 300 minerals to build a single cannon and about 85 seconds... The other player can just hold back with the zealots, and work towards 4gating the cannoning player because if the cannon is not at the rim of your buildings, stalkers can pick off every building at range 6 until they just overpower you in whatever way they prefer.
On June 14 2011 20:33 Probe1 wrote: I've never heard anyone say: If someone 6 pools you 6 pool them If someone scv marine all ins SCV MARINE ALL IN!!!1! If someone cannon cheeses you make many cannons in and around their base for ezpz win
The hell kind of... If they proxy 2 gate you.. you proxy 2 gate at home?
Yeah micro battle, got it. But wouldn't it be wiser to just build a cannon?
No because it's 300 minerals to build a single cannon and about 85 seconds... The other player can just hold back with the zealots, and work towards 4gating the cannoning player because if the cannon is not at the rim of your buildings, stalkers can pick off every building at range 6 until they just overpower you in whatever way they prefer.
It's 150 minerals for a cannon?
150 for forge, 150 for cannon. Also 85 seconds = 45 seconds for forge and 40 seconds for cannon.
I want to become an SC2 personality, but first, I need a few goals and ideas. Clearly 3 things that I can get started with are casting, doing a show, and streaming, but I don't really have a lot of experience or reputation to instantly draw in a crowd, so instead, I have to figure out some interesting ideas:
Casting - I think my style will be a balance of entertainment and basic analysis. Should I just shoot for joking around or just drumming up energy? What would you like to see a new caster bring to the scene?
Show - I don't really have the credentials to coach or do good analysis (I'm high gold, low platinum), and I don't even have a big history of RTS games. Been with SC2 since Beta, though. Do you think there's some niche content that should be out there?
Stream - Since I'm not a pro, should I just forget about this right now, until I have a reputation? Streaming is a really simple concept, but what do you think could be done differently on streams?
In one of the Day9 dailies (I forgot which one) he showed us a programm which could start a Replay without starting SC2. Could anyone tell me the name of that programm?
Umm.. I double click replays and it starts SC2. You should just associate replay files with sc2.
Softboing- you should look for another caster to show you the ropes and give you some air time. Most casters have significant knowledge of the game and experience but there are new ones every day. If you can't find a way to immediately stream games then you might want to think about casting replays of pro players and posting them on youtube. I'm sure there is a niche for you somewhere. Best of luck.
In one of the Day9 dailies (I forgot which one) he showed us a programm which could start a Replay without starting SC2. Could anyone tell me the name of that programm?
If you go into your Drive:/programfiles/starcraft2 there should be an icon called "Starcraft 2 Dropper" just drag and drop replays onto that there and it'll load right up without you having to log-in.
I want to become an SC2 personality, but first, I need a few goals and ideas. Clearly 3 things that I can get started with are casting, doing a show, and streaming, but I don't really have a lot of experience or reputation to instantly draw in a crowd, so instead, I have to figure out some interesting ideas:
Casting - I think my style will be a balance of entertainment and basic analysis. Should I just shoot for joking around or just drumming up energy? What would you like to see a new caster bring to the scene?
Show - I don't really have the credentials to coach or do good analysis (I'm high gold, low platinum), and I don't even have a big history of RTS games. Been with SC2 since Beta, though. Do you think there's some niche content that should be out there?
Stream - Since I'm not a pro, should I just forget about this right now, until I have a reputation? Streaming is a really simple concept, but what do you think could be done differently on streams?
In the words of Day9, just do it. The more you cast/stream the better/more interesting they'll get and you'll be able to find out exactly what you want to do. Watching pros is really fun, but it would also be awesome to watch someone at your level getting better at the game.
For casting I would just say do what's most comfortable. I really like the energy of Husky, but that's only because he can pull it off so well and doesn't fumble over himself too often. On the other hand you have guys like ForceSC2strategy that's pretty much just analysis.
Just go for it and see what you can do, most importantly be sure to have fun. You can always mix up 1v1, 2v2, funny games, newbie play, interesting strategies, etc. You'll get feedback from the viewers and can adjust your style. Hope that gives you some ideas, thanks for reading.
I wonder what people/tournaments think about programs that basically switch keys around (for example when you click shift it counts as alt and vice versa) and mouse keys? I plan on playing about as seriously as it gets, so I want to make sure I use the best hotkey setup I can when I start.
I'd think that it's fine, despite the fact that this might give an advantage possibly not avaliable to some (particularly the mouse keys), so do many other factors like different gear, bigger monitor or faster computer, but I just want to make sure I don't get used to something not allowed.
In one of the Day9 dailies (I forgot which one) he showed us a programm which could start a Replay without starting SC2. Could anyone tell me the name of that programm?
If you go into your Drive:/programfiles/starcraft2 there should be an icon called "Starcraft 2 Dropper" just drag and drop replays onto that there and it'll load right up without you having to log-in.
I can't find a Starcraft 2 Dropper, did you mean Starcraft 2 Switcher?
In one of the Day9 dailies (I forgot which one) he showed us a programm which could start a Replay without starting SC2. Could anyone tell me the name of that programm?
If you go into your Drive:/programfiles/starcraft2 there should be an icon called "Starcraft 2 Dropper" just drag and drop replays onto that there and it'll load right up without you having to log-in.
I can't find a Starcraft 2 Dropper, did you mean Starcraft 2 Switcher?
Really? I cannot find neither a Starcraft 2 Dropper or a Starcraft 2 Switcher. I checked in C/Program Files (x86)/Starcraft II and can only find Starcraft II, Starcraft II repair and Starcraft II Public Test Client
EDIT: It's actually located in C/Program Files/Starcraft II/Support (In the case of a 64 bit Windows OS as I'm using, Program Files (x86)) and it's an application called SC2Switcher.
In one of the Day9 dailies (I forgot which one) he showed us a programm which could start a Replay without starting SC2. Could anyone tell me the name of that programm?
If you go into your Drive:/programfiles/starcraft2 there should be an icon called "Starcraft 2 Dropper" just drag and drop replays onto that there and it'll load right up without you having to log-in.
I can't find a Starcraft 2 Dropper, did you mean Starcraft 2 Switcher?
Really? I cannot find neither a Starcraft 2 Dropper or a Starcraft 2 Switcher. I checked in C/Program Files (x86)/Starcraft II and can only find Starcraft II, Starcraft II repair and Starcraft II Public Test Client
EDIT: It's actually located in C/Program Files/Starcraft II/Support (In the case of a 64 bit Windows OS as I'm using, Program Files (x86)) and it's an application called SC2Switcher.
Knew I wasn't crazy :D
EDIT: Actually, I'm just wrong. When I drag a replay to the Switcher it makes me log in. Anyone know how to do this without logging in?
In one of the Day9 dailies (I forgot which one) he showed us a programm which could start a Replay without starting SC2. Could anyone tell me the name of that programm?
If you go into your Drive:/programfiles/starcraft2 there should be an icon called "Starcraft 2 Dropper" just drag and drop replays onto that there and it'll load right up without you having to log-in.
I can't find a Starcraft 2 Dropper, did you mean Starcraft 2 Switcher?
Really? I cannot find neither a Starcraft 2 Dropper or a Starcraft 2 Switcher. I checked in C/Program Files (x86)/Starcraft II and can only find Starcraft II, Starcraft II repair and Starcraft II Public Test Client
EDIT: It's actually located in C/Program Files/Starcraft II/Support (In the case of a 64 bit Windows OS as I'm using, Program Files (x86)) and it's an application called SC2Switcher.
Knew I wasn't crazy :D
EDIT: Actually, I'm just wrong. When I drag a replay to the Switcher it makes me log in. Anyone know how to do this without logging in?
Have you tried it with a replay from a previous version? Or does it still make you log in even then?
EDIT: I've tried it with previous version replays. I think that you don't need to log in then. This is actually awesome because if you try to view previous version replays when you have the game client itself opened up then you are basically forced to log out and then log back in once the replay is done.
What I've learned from Day9 is you can make a folder inside of your default replay folders and add multiple replays there (so you can watch in game without exiting)
I'd like to follow this up with a question of my own.
Are there any SC2 replay sites that let you upload replay packs? I want to upload a few but don't want to use typical download sites like MegaUpload or Rapidshare (I don't really like those sites for different reasons.)
It just feels like a hassle to individually upload each replay to a site like ReplayFu or SC2Replayed.
On June 16 2011 21:52 Softboing wrote: I want to become an SC2 personality, but first, I need a few goals and ideas. Clearly 3 things that I can get started with are casting, doing a show, and streaming, but I don't really have a lot of experience or reputation to instantly draw in a crowd, so instead, I have to figure out some interesting ideas:
Casting - I think my style will be a balance of entertainment and basic analysis. Should I just shoot for joking around or just drumming up energy? What would you like to see a new caster bring to the scene?
Show - I don't really have the credentials to coach or do good analysis (I'm high gold, low platinum), and I don't even have a big history of RTS games. Been with SC2 since Beta, though. Do you think there's some niche content that should be out there?
Stream - Since I'm not a pro, should I just forget about this right now, until I have a reputation? Streaming is a really simple concept, but what do you think could be done differently on streams?
Hey for deciding what style of casting you should do, the more you experiment with casting the quicker you should realize which style you're more comfortable with; casting should come naturally so don't force a style you don't feel comfortable with or don't even like, do what you want
But IMO you want to play the game more and learn a bit before casting, otherwise you'll be going off pure play-by-play which isn't too good if you're solo-casting :\
I think it would be interesting to watch almost like a diary-style series of videos where you progress from the lower leagues to Diamond then Master; maybe others having the same issues as you can relate and then see how you fix them?
You know, I've constantly been asking myself time and time again, "why are the minerals in every single sc2 map so spread apart?"
And then SUDDENLY, I came to a realization, (whether Blizzard intentionally did this or not,) the minerals being far apart actually PREVENTS opponent Protosses from doing manner pylons....
Manner Pylon = building a pylon in between the mineral paths and workers so that workers can't mine properly and will often block a worker in between the tiny spaces in the minerals
You guys think Blizzard KNEW about this? Or was it just done?
On June 17 2011 07:45 Probe1 wrote: Not that I know of Clbull.
Newish interview with Dustin/Kim on HotS and balancing. I die a little inside every time I hear them talk about the game.Link here.
What is so difficult to listen to what they are saying? I thought David Kim gave a lot of information about how they approach balance and even said they are balancing HotS multiplayer and working on maps right now, he didn't try to hide anything or sound like he had no idea what he was doing. David Kim is always very interesting to listen to in interviews. Browder was only talking about singleplayer so there was nothing strange or misleading in that regard.
Can someone give me three all-in builds for each matchup (one for each) as a Terran player to be used in close positions?
I am losing every game here because whatever I do, it just doesn't work because I'm not an all-in-ish player. I need some all-in builds to just finish these shitty games as fast as possible. Can anyone PM me about it?
On June 17 2011 07:45 Probe1 wrote: Not that I know of Clbull.
Newish interview with Dustin/Kim on HotS and balancing. I die a little inside every time I hear them talk about the game.Link here.
What is so difficult to listen to what they are saying? I thought David Kim gave a lot of information about how they approach balance and even said they are balancing HotS multiplayer and working on maps right now, he didn't try to hide anything or sound like he had no idea what he was doing. David Kim is always very interesting to listen to in interviews. Browder was only talking about singleplayer so there was nothing strange or misleading in that regard.
In the interviews I've seen their idea of Starcraft is very different from my own. And it scares me. Hearing that units may be removed because they are "uncool" or that they are looking at balancing issues that I don't think are actually issues bothers me. Perhaps I worded it too strongly but I don't want to see a constant stream of balance and rebalance and balance changes.
David Kim did give a lot of information and I don't disagree with anything in your post. I just don't like the information they give you. I've been thinking pretty hard about the information they've presented so far and I'm very opinionated about it. I don't know if this is the best place to voice them, if at all.
In one of the Day9 dailies (I forgot which one) he showed us a programm which could start a Replay without starting SC2. Could anyone tell me the name of that programm?
If you go into your Drive:/programfiles/starcraft2 there should be an icon called "Starcraft 2 Dropper" just drag and drop replays onto that there and it'll load right up without you having to log-in.
I can't find a Starcraft 2 Dropper, did you mean Starcraft 2 Switcher?
Really? I cannot find neither a Starcraft 2 Dropper or a Starcraft 2 Switcher. I checked in C/Program Files (x86)/Starcraft II and can only find Starcraft II, Starcraft II repair and Starcraft II Public Test Client
EDIT: It's actually located in C/Program Files/Starcraft II/Support (In the case of a 64 bit Windows OS as I'm using, Program Files (x86)) and it's an application called SC2Switcher.
Knew I wasn't crazy :D
EDIT: Actually, I'm just wrong. When I drag a replay to the Switcher it makes me log in. Anyone know how to do this without logging in?
Have you tried it with a replay from a previous version? Or does it still make you log in even then?
EDIT: I've tried it with previous version replays. I think that you don't need to log in then. This is actually awesome because if you try to view previous version replays when you have the game client itself opened up then you are basically forced to log out and then log back in once the replay is done.
So basically the only utility of the whole thing is to watch old replays?
On June 18 2011 05:33 bardtown wrote: Hello, new player here and I have some basic mechanics questions that I don't think are really worth their own topic, so here goes:
Tyvm!!
Welcome to team liquid! Simple Question Simple Answer thread. Simple questions simple answers is the destination you're looking for. Be sure to read the stickied threads in Strategy before posting and starting threads.
1. Too general of a question. Whatever way you can pan fastest with accuracy is the best way for you. 2. Middle mouse is not exclusive, you can move the camera with any method. 3. Too ambiguous, please specify what race. If you were zerg your hotkeys would be immensely different from protoss. 4. You can set bookmarks with F5-F8 (I'm not sure what exact ones they are as I remapped them) Check hotkey information in game for further info. Also I need to know what race your playing. As a zerg player I use backspace (remapped to `~tilde) to quickly cycle through hatcheries and I double tap hotkeys to quickly move to my army if it isn't split in several places. 5. Here are several links. General tips Thread with builds and guides. Liquipedia is good too. These questions definitely belong in Simple Questions, Simple Answers.
Hi thanks for the quick response . Just checking through the guide thread right now then I'll see what I can find on Liquipedia. I actually play Random for all games at the moment, but my strongest race is Protoss so I may main that at a later date.
I apologize if this isn't the correct forum for this post but I am trying to let people know about a free tournament being held geared towards Starcraft 2 players of every skill level. The website is www.lastplayerstanding.com so you can check it out for yourselves. It is free entry with a $700 CDN prize pool. This is their first tournament and is being kept relatively small (only 32 spots going to the first 32 who register). Players of any skill level are encouraged to join. Registration is taking place now and games are set to begin June 30.
@Oilblaze - Tournaments can be advertised here - SC2 Tournament forums (you can also in here too since this can be for anything SC2 related I think but more people will find it in the SC2 tournament forum section). ______________________________ I have a question (for anyone that knows) - You can add both a EU Starcraft 2 license on your account even if it's NA right?
I go to eu.battle.net (for example) and log in with my na account (which works).
I can just digitally purchase EU version and then download the client + use it to play on Europe server right? (It gave me a warning that I could only connect to the NA server when I was purchasing. Is that supposed to happen? Note it was definitely the EU site since the values were in euro and the site was eu.battle.net).
Also is there any automatic USD to euro conversion with credit card purchase on battle.net?
Finally can purchases be made through paypal?
One more question >.> - How many of you can play on Europe with "noticeable" lag [if so how much approx]? If so are you on US west or east? Now I do remember playing a few Singapore games on WC3 and it wasn't too bad (though it was definitely noticeable).
Hi, i know this is an odd question, but does anyone know the name of the song in the INTRO of GSL tournament (June 2011) where theres a computer made bird flying?... Thank you.
On June 18 2011 14:47 Goldfish wrote: @Oilblaze - Tournaments can be advertised here - SC2 Tournament forums (you can also in here too since this can be for anything SC2 related I think but more people will find it in the SC2 tournament forum section).
One more question >.> - How many of you can play on Europe with "noticeable" lag [if so how much approx]? If so are you on US west or east? Now I do remember playing a few Singapore games on WC3 and it wasn't too bad (though it was definitely noticeable).
Any help will be appreciated, thanks .
Yup, thats where tourney ads go.
I don't have a EU account but I did play a few custom 1v1s on a friends account once. I didn't have any lag from Florida (east coast US) to EU server.
I'm looking for the GSL song right now.
Edit: Forgot about it, sorry. Here you go.
On June 18 2011 21:36 Claudia_Kitty wrote: Hi, i know this is an odd question, but does anyone know the name of the song in the INTRO of GSL tournament (June 2011) where theres a computer made bird flying?... Thank you.
Youtube video enclosed within spoiler. Sixx: A.M. - This is Gonna Hurt + Show Spoiler +
(I didn't want to direct embed the video but I didn't know how to just give a link to a youtube video so I spoilered it. I hope thats alright!)
On June 18 2011 00:27 Bleak wrote: Can someone give me three all-in builds for each matchup (one for each) as a Terran player to be used in close positions?
I am losing every game here because whatever I do, it just doesn't work because I'm not an all-in-ish player. I need some all-in builds to just finish these shitty games as fast as possible. Can anyone PM me about it?
All-in builds don't help you learn how to play the game better. They just give you free wins to make you seem like you are getting better until you start playing opponents who actually know how to scout and defend it properly. Then you are stuck knowing basically nothing.
That being said, a good build TvZ that's not all-in is the 2 rax bunker rush build. It's literally being done is almost every single pro TvZ these days. Kinda rediculous because it can win the game outright but if it doesn't you can transition into a 4 rax all-in or expand quickly and the zerg can't scout which one you are doing.
Why don't we see blue flame hellions more in top TvP? They destroy zealots and let you go pure marauder viking to fuck up the rest of the protoss army. I'm gonna be trying a build like this on the ladder, I'll see how it goes. Has anyone else had any experience with this type of play in TvP?
On June 17 2011 04:28 -Aura- wrote: EDIT: Actually, I'm just wrong. When I drag a replay to the Switcher it makes me log in. Anyone know how to do this without logging in?
I found the switcher as well, but it also makes me log in anyway. I remember few months ago you could drag replays onto the regular SC2 executable, and you didn't have to log in. Don't understand why they changed this.
Well for the All-in question, as far as I know there is...
- 2 rax bunker rush (vs Zerg) - 6 rax all in (any) - 3 rax stim timing (vs Protoss) Although this isn't really an all-in it puts you behind economically.
I think that the bnet chat windows at the bottom should have different indicators for what was the last thing to happen.
When I click a blinking chat box to see what had happened, and the player has left it's like oh ok. but when you have 90x chatboxes and see that it's annoying.
maybe instead of the blue blink, a red blinking chat box to indicate such.
On June 18 2011 00:27 Bleak wrote: Can someone give me three all-in builds for each matchup (one for each) as a Terran player to be used in close positions?
I am losing every game here because whatever I do, it just doesn't work because I'm not an all-in-ish player. I need some all-in builds to just finish these shitty games as fast as possible. Can anyone PM me about it?
All-in builds don't help you learn how to play the game better. They just give you free wins to make you seem like you are getting better until you start playing opponents who actually know how to scout and defend it properly. Then you are stuck knowing basically nothing.
That being said, a good build TvZ that's not all-in is the 2 rax bunker rush build. It's literally being done is almost every single pro TvZ these days. Kinda rediculous because it can win the game outright but if it doesn't you can transition into a 4 rax all-in or expand quickly and the zerg can't scout which one you are doing.
Why is nearly everyone saying "no gg - no skill" in wrong context? It's originated from White-ra stream when he was explaining how with every lost game you learn something and become better thus "no gg" - stands for "no lost games". How is typing gg in any way related to skill? This doesn't make any sense in wrong context...
On June 19 2011 08:57 Jesushooves wrote: Does anyone know if dreamhack summer replays/ vods will be up, and where they will be up? I've looked around and haven't found anything.
Hey guys I was curious about something. I was going to try it out in-game but I'm not a high level player, just a silver league player. What I was wondering was about using Reapers as terran for more than just map control or worker harass? Like let me give you an example:
MMA does alot of drops while simultaneously attacking from the front or an expansion with Medvacs loaded with Marines.
What if instead of using Marines you used Reapers? I mean I was thinking that because Reapers with +1 weapons does so much damage to structures that instead of dropping to destroy the workers and hopefully a pylon/supply depot or two before you have to evacuate, while attacking the front with your army, creep in the back with a Medvac filled with Reapers and take out say key enemy structures. I'll give another example of how it would kinda work out in my head:
Say you're Terran obviously, and your opponent is Protoss. Say it's also nearing the meta game, both of you have 2 or 3 bases established already. You're making your standard army composition vs Protoss, and say every 5 Marauders or so you produce, you make a Reaper. Once you have enough Reapers to fill a Medvac, push an expansion or his natural or what have you with your army, then slip in the back with the Reapers with +1/+2/+3 what have you, and take out key structures such as say the Robotics Facility if he is going Colossi, or Templar Archives/Fleet Beacon what have you. Once he comes back to defend just load up and hit him somewhere else or wait until you're army is ready to move out again.
How would that work out at the higher levels like say Diamond through Grandmasters? Or in general in just normal play regardless of league? I mean when I do my drops with my Marines I don't go for the mineral line against Protoss or Zerg, I try and snipe the pylons that are keeping his Warpgates active, or the Spire/Spawning Pool or what have you so that they either A.) Can't reinforce their army fighting mine at their front, or B.) Only be able to reinforce with half of what they normally would have.
At least at my league(Silver) when I snipe the pylons keeping their unit structures active, if my army just barely makes it through the fight and I have to retreat, I feel that it usually buys me about 30 seconds or so lead on my opponent because at least versus Protoss at my level, it usually takes them a second to realize they can't warp in anymore units, then they have to take a probe and build 3-5 pylons to reactivate them which takes 17 seconds per pylon so I feel when I do that I usually get in a pretty good lead army wise.
I was just wondering if you guys thought it would be good to exchange Marines for Reapers in tech sniping or harassment drops, or if it would be too cost inefficient to do so?
Thank you very much in advanced and sorry for this post being so big.
Stimmed marines are ridiculously good. Reapers are great against buildings but a stimmed marine is amazing against everything. Should players add in 1-2 reapers in with 6 marines for a drop? Yes, theres nothing wrong with that. Except you're cutting out marauders from your army which, if you're going bio agaisnt protoss is clutch.
I like how you think but a double marauder drop takes out things so ridiculously fast and they're line army units, durable and multi use. It seems like it'd make more sense versus zerg but if you lose reapers, you're losing a lot of gas, while the safer route, marines are very cheap and easily massed.
On June 19 2011 07:23 Seeker wrote: So I was just wondering....
When you get placed in a league, then get placed in the division, who names these divisions? They're like the strangest names ever.
Unit/Character from Starcraft world + Greek alphabet
It's probably randomly generated when a new division opens up.
Zedders you're on to something there. That problem irrates me as well.
That pattern does not always hold. I was in Nargil Uncle when I was in gold. But yeah, for the most part, it often is an SC lore word and a Greek letter. And it definitely seems randomly generated.
On June 19 2011 21:15 Probe1 wrote: Stimmed marines are ridiculously good. Reapers are great against buildings but a stimmed marine is amazing against everything. Should players add in 1-2 reapers in with 6 marines for a drop? Yes, theres nothing wrong with that. Except you're cutting out marauders from your army which, if you're going bio agaisnt protoss is clutch.
I like how you think but a double marauder drop takes out things so ridiculously fast and they're line army units, durable and multi use. It seems like it'd make more sense versus zerg but if you lose reapers, you're losing a lot of gas, while the safer route, marines are very cheap and easily massed.
Well that's why I was suggesting maybe like instead of rushing to Reapers, you did your standard MMM build against Toss, but say every 3-5 marauders you make, make 1 Reaper, then once you have 1 Medvac worth of Reapers, stop making them all together and go back to full marauder/marine.
On June 19 2011 21:15 Probe1 wrote: Stimmed marines are ridiculously good. Reapers are great against buildings but a stimmed marine is amazing against everything. Should players add in 1-2 reapers in with 6 marines for a drop? Yes, theres nothing wrong with that. Except you're cutting out marauders from your army which, if you're going bio agaisnt protoss is clutch.
I like how you think but a double marauder drop takes out things so ridiculously fast and they're line army units, durable and multi use. It seems like it'd make more sense versus zerg but if you lose reapers, you're losing a lot of gas, while the safer route, marines are very cheap and easily massed.
Well that's why I was suggesting maybe like instead of rushing to Reapers, you did your standard MMM build against Toss, but say every 3-5 marauders you make, make 1 Reaper, then once you have 1 Medvac worth of Reapers, stop making them all together and go back to full marauder/marine.
It all comes down to you could but you need to extensively test it to see if its so much more cost/time effective than a marauder drop. And then there's the openness it leaves you if Protoss puts on full aggression. You have 4-8 special tacktics units that can do okay damage against zealots but terribly bad damage against stalkers.
I got starcraft 2 a while ago about october but messed around a lot and was in bronze pretty deep, season 2 came around and I started winning a lot, currently my win loss ratio (been keeping track of it on a notepad since they took out the losses) is 55 wins to 16 losses, and the last 15 or so games have been against silvers and golds. I just beat a rank 5 gold last game and I am _still_ not promoted to silver. Does anyone know how long it would take? Lots of people are saying "after the second gold leaguer I played in a row I was promoted" and "i played a platinum and lost then I played a gold and won and got promoted to silver" is it going to happen soon or should I just forget about it and let it go?
Recently I just got _really_ into starcraft and I am trying to get as good as I can as fast as I can thats why I suddenly started winning a lot.
I have a simple question, how would it work in MC v. Idra game on Metal with the massive blink stalker push, if say Zerg had Dark Swarm instead of FG? Fungal growth is good, but not sure Idra could have enough energy or infestors (and roaches on top of that!) to clear out that army or at least severely damage it to force it back. Not to mention MC has great blink micro and could just blink forward to take them out.
I've been thinking, with Dark Swarm, Zerg would gain more time to reinforce, and more fighting time against that ball. Due to the smartcast it perhaps would have to be toned down in duration ( I don't know, 4 seconds and 2-3 swarms per infestor?) but it perhaps could get Zerg more time in the least. Does anyone think this could be a relief for this heavy blink stalker play in say, Heart of the Swarm?
EDIT: Just to clarify, I'm not specifically asking in relation to the the position Idra was in at the point of the attack, but asking how Dark Swarm would work in a similar situation where Zerg needs time to reinforce and desperately trying to slow down the P army, and gain time.
On June 20 2011 05:44 HamzasSister wrote: I got starcraft 2 a while ago about october but messed around a lot and was in bronze pretty deep, season 2 came around and I started winning a lot, currently my win loss ratio (been keeping track of it on a notepad since they took out the losses) is 55 wins to 16 losses, and the last 15 or so games have been against silvers and golds. I just beat a rank 5 gold last game and I am _still_ not promoted to silver. Does anyone know how long it would take? Lots of people are saying "after the second gold leaguer I played in a row I was promoted" and "i played a platinum and lost then I played a gold and won and got promoted to silver" is it going to happen soon or should I just forget about it and let it go?
Recently I just got _really_ into starcraft and I am trying to get as good as I can as fast as I can thats why I suddenly started winning a lot.
(I apologize if this seems snide. I don't mean it that way) Have you checked out the Comprehensive League Guide? There is a load of useful information in there. I'm hesitant to bring it up.. but recently a lot of people were having issues with being promoted. It was hotfixed or resolved somehow and the problem is no longer there. You should be getting a promotion any time now
Bleak that is a hell of a difficult question to answer. What if Zerg had plague instead of fungal? I'll leave it to be answered by someone wiser than me.
Any one know why Venus GSTL group has two Bo7s (FXOpen (HWAITING!) vs StarTale Incredible Miracle vs fOu) whereas Jupiter group has only one Bo7 (SlayerS vs MVP)
On June 19 2011 07:23 Seeker wrote: So I was just wondering....
When you get placed in a league, then get placed in the division, who names these divisions? They're like the strangest names ever.
Unit/Character from Starcraft world + Greek alphabet
It's probably randomly generated when a new division opens up.
Zedders you're on to something there. That problem irrates me as well.
That pattern does not always hold. I was in Nargil Uncle when I was in gold. But yeah, for the most part, it often is an SC lore word and a Greek letter. And it definitely seems randomly generated.
one of my accts is in "Baneling Juliet" [gold] >.>
The picture enclosed confuses me. Competitors flamed him and accused him of hacking so he won't release replays? Wouldn't replays confirm that he wasn't hacking?
Well, either way it'll be exciting to see him play if he's as good as you say.
On June 20 2011 06:04 Bleak wrote: I have a simple question, how would it work in MC v. Idra game on Metal with the massive blink stalker push, if say Zerg had Dark Swarm instead of FG? Fungal growth is good, but not sure Idra could have enough energy or infestors (and roaches on top of that!) to clear out that army or at least severely damage it to force it back. Not to mention MC has great blink micro and could just blink forward to take them out.
I've been thinking, with Dark Swarm, Zerg would gain more time to reinforce, and more fighting time against that ball. Due to the smartcast it perhaps would have to be toned down in duration ( I don't know, 4 seconds and 2-3 swarms per infestor?) but it perhaps could get Zerg more time in the least. Does anyone think this could be a relief for this heavy blink stalker play in say, Heart of the Swarm?
EDIT: Just to clarify, I'm not specifically asking in relation to the the position Idra was in at the point of the attack, but asking how Dark Swarm would work in a similar situation where Zerg needs time to reinforce and desperately trying to slow down the P army, and gain time.
Your question is a bit confusing and not to sound rude but it is very counter productive to think about things such as 'what if zerg had x unit or x spell'.
Fungal counters blink stalker by keeping them in place already.
Dark swarm would break ZvT as there is no irradiate/T lacks melee units. Yes, siege tanks are still viable but units only take the splash damage. Though I would gladly give Z DS and T Irradiate if psi storm was like BW.
So with all this HotS reveal stuff that happened recently, are they going to add clan functionality once and for all? WoW had this at launch with guilds, WC3 TFT (idk about RoC) had clans and that came out in '03 so yeah..
On June 20 2011 11:09 Dusty wrote: So with all this HotS reveal stuff that happened recently, are they going to add clan functionality once and for all? WoW had this at launch with guilds, WC3 TFT (idk about RoC) had clans and that came out in '03 so yeah..
Not sure they'll add that. There's so many things that they need to add besides that.
With WoW, having guilds was a pretty integral part of the game considering the game required others to help you get certain things. Starcraft 2 isn't like that at all.
What is the typical learning curve for this game? I just got this game after watching pro gameplay for a while so I know general strategy but I don't have the mechanics. I didnt expect to dominate immediately but I am curious what is normal. I enjoy the game a lot but I get annoyed when I let my money get high in the midgame as zerg.
Btw, I have no prior RTS experience, so consider that.
On June 20 2011 11:51 nDefined wrote: What is the typical learning curve for this game? I just got this game after watching pro gameplay for a while so I know general strategy but I don't have the mechanics. I didnt expect to dominate immediately but I am curious what is normal. I enjoy the game a lot but I get annoyed when I let my money get high in the midgame as zerg.
Btw, I have no prior RTS experience, so consider that.
try and watch your replays and notice the point where your money starts to get high, and see what your currently doing, if its a battle then its more acceptable (because your focusing on it) if your not doing anything, ask yourself, what could you have done to keep your money low, try taking another expo, upgrades, marco hatcherys, as zerg your minerals can pile up as you tend to need alot of gas mid-late game.
Now when watching tournament games I get this feeling.. KR players have often an spesific timing attack or cheesy push which aims for sure kill at certain time. I think Eu and US players aim for good "normal" macro game :| Is this why we seem to lose to koreans?
On June 20 2011 11:51 nDefined wrote: What is the typical learning curve for this game? I just got this game after watching pro gameplay for a while so I know general strategy but I don't have the mechanics. I didnt expect to dominate immediately but I am curious what is normal. I enjoy the game a lot but I get annoyed when I let my money get high in the midgame as zerg.
Btw, I have no prior RTS experience, so consider that.
You really don't know strategy. The lesson is humility. Every tournament a pro is embarrassed somewhere somehow by overconfidence and you or I will be no different.
Even if it sounds like marauders counter stalkers and zealots counter marauders there is an incredible amount of nuance that makes what should be an obvious counter a terrible choice.
Watching starcraft is like seeing a opera with the sound off (at times). You have to learn not what units to make, but why you make them.
As far as a learning curve, it is different for everyone. Some people reach ceilings. Some people become amateurs then professionals. I'm stuck at the top of platinum. Your learning curve will depend on your devotion to improvement. I rely on tactical intelligence and insane timings rather than studying my replays and improving. While we can show you everything it will be up to you whether you want Master or not.
If you think I'm full of crap then build a macro hatch around 8-10 minutes and take a third by 12-15. You're problem is you're trying to produce off two hatcheries and even if you have perfect inject/overlord timings it is downright hard for anyone to spend all of your income off two hatcheries if you've saturated both mineral lines.
gl hf!
On June 20 2011 13:05 FinBenton wrote: Now when watching tournament games I get this feeling.. KR players have often an spesific timing attack or cheesy push which aims for sure kill at certain time. I think Eu and US players aim for good "normal" macro game :| Is this why we seem to lose to koreans?
I think you're confusing macro with turtling. KR server is known for being much more aggressive than other servers and I don't think it's considered cheese to bring workers or do hard timing attacks. You want your opponent dead, whether it be with zealots or a mothership; at four minutes or forty.
I see cheese as high risk/reward strats that require your opponent not to scout it or abusive ... sorry for a second there my zerg QQ almost got the best of me.
I view cheese as any type/style or build of playing that has no follow up strategy or thought process past the initial couple of attacks.
Like a 6 pool all-in I consider cheese because there is no mid/late game strategy if the all-in fails. Any particular type of build or play that is done in the early early game that if it failed would almost guarantee a loss in the meta game in my opinion is cheese. Most people I run into on the ladder when they do a 6pool/10pool, mass marine all-in or protoss' various cheeses, and it fails they just leave the game. Those are what I consider cheese.
It takes skill to go into a macro/micro meta game, it doesn't take skill to just simply not make workers and drop a spawning pool as soon as you get 200 minerals then all-in everything.
It's a contentious debate. Everyone see's cheese in their own way. I once went a week straight with a friend in 2s double 8 pooling with a specific mindset to cripple them early so the midgame would be easier. I've found the golden number for a cheese pool is killing 5 workers.
We had a build order and transition into mid game and there was a reason he shared control and I did all the micro with the lings. He sucked at micro and it takes snap decision making for it to pay off. Even in 1s if someone 6 pools me I just lol. It takes a lot of work to make some cheeses work. Though cannon rushing like a BOSS just takes balls :D
I don't think that cheese exists in the sense that the real game is a macro game. Just because the game does offer tier 3 units they don't need to appear in every game. If a sixpool offers a good reward-to-risk ratio, it is a good strategy.
The typical pro gamer who is confident with his skill will probably seek a long game ("macro game".) If he however is beaten by a "cheese", he lost rightly so.
On June 19 2011 08:47 Dariusz wrote: Why is nearly everyone saying "no gg - no skill" in wrong context? It's originated from White-ra stream when he was explaining how with every lost game you learn something and become better thus "no gg" - stands for "no lost games". How is typing gg in any way related to skill? This doesn't make any sense in wrong context...
Because it refers to the mindset. If you type gg after a loss game, you show respect for your opponent and blame yourself for the loss. So you are open-minded to actually learn from the game.
Idea: What if in addition to your starting worker building and initial workers, each race started with a new race-specific scouting unit that, if used with a reasonable amount of skill, could provide guaranteed scouting up through the point where the other scouting options for your race generally become available (scan/observer/overseer). Each player only gets his one scouting unit at the beginning of the game, and cannot make more -- they're just intended to provide effective early-game scouting to avoid coin-flip situations and blind build-order losses.
For example, say you're playing a random on TDE who spawns as zerg and decides to 6-pool. Normally it's a coin-flip if you scout him in time to prepare unless you send an initial worker to scout. However, with the dedicated scouting unit, you would be able to scout the 6-pool early enough to hold it off.
These scout units would need some special limitations so that they can only function for scouting as well as some special abilities so that their scouting cannot be denied when they are used with reasonable skill. So for example you wouldn't want the scouting units to be able to provide high-ground visibility for blink stalkers or mess up the pathing of enemy units or anything like that. But you would want the scouting unit to have a 100% chance (barring stupid mistakes) of making it into your opponent's base regardless of wall-off and staying there for the first 5-6 minutes of the game (or whatever time period is reasonable).
I don't really have a fully fleshed-out idea yet, but what about this concept in general?
On June 20 2011 13:05 FinBenton wrote: Now when watching tournament games I get this feeling.. KR players have often an spesific timing attack or cheesy push which aims for sure kill at certain time. I think Eu and US players aim for good "normal" macro game :| Is this why we seem to lose to koreans?
It's because Koreans understand the game better and have a winning mindset. A lot of EU and most NA players except IdrA (who was a zerg in Korea who must have seen every timing push possible) only have a vague concept of timings. They'll see a person go nexus first and go "hmm, a macro game, better take additional bases and upgrade even if I'm slightly behind and try to even it out in the mid or late game" whereas the Koreans see it as "well, if I two rax and bring some workers I've pretty much given myself a huge advantage and will almost certainly win". Koreans play to win, foreigners play to play.
On June 21 2011 00:21 galivet wrote: I don't really have a fully fleshed-out idea yet, but what about this concept in general?
I don't like it because it makes the game more complex. One normally can defend a sixpool blindly. If you get caught by it, you were too greedy.
Scouting is a complex issue (where to send the first probes / Overlords) and this is part of the fun, I think.
Since I play zerg I know how hard it is to scout a Terran who usually walls himself in. I rely on scouting the front and the timing when (and if at all) he expands before I can send a speedlord or overseer into his base. But it would be too easy if I had guaranteed scouting for 5 or 6 minutes.
General zerg question: In a 'normal' game, what are the expected Lair / Hive timings? I realize this can vary WILDLY depending on situations, but let's say you hatch first and no early pressure is really coming and you're not RUSHING for anything. Give or take a couple minutes / relative to what amount of food, when should I be taking lair?
Hi guys- I want to know if you all think I'm a bad person or awesome after hearing this ladder story:
I was playing a TvT on the ladder in the Master league. My opponent was slightly favored. I noticed that my opponent walled off his ramp, so I decided that I would just play the regular heavy Marine/Tank/Viking style, and try to eventually siege his ramp. My opponent tried a Hellion drop and a Banshee which I was prepared for. I decided to push out, and Sieged right outside his base (he didn't expand yet). My opponent also went for the standard Terran army, but I had slightly more since I didn't try a drop or a Banshee. I set up a few turrets as well to deal with possible Banshees. I used Raven PDD for mini Viking battles, and contained my opponent.
So my opponent starts complaining, and after a few lines starts saying how bad I played, and how terrible of a player I am, and he keeps going on and on and on. The only thing I say after a while is that he can still win (I wanted him to shut up), which I honestly believed. He eventually leaves much later, and messages me after the game several times. He says he hopes to play me again, and sure enough, we get matched up again.
He starts talking from the beginning.. and eventually I realized that I lost the game. He outplayed me that game, just like I outplayed him on the first. For his terrible, terrible behavior of ruining my gameplay experience, I decided to try the "pause glitch" for the first time, and I was so happy that it actually worked. We both got losses and each lost 0 points. I didn't care about my own stats, but it felt so good taking away a win from a such an annoying player.
On June 20 2011 13:05 FinBenton wrote: Now when watching tournament games I get this feeling.. KR players have often an spesific timing attack or cheesy push which aims for sure kill at certain time. I think Eu and US players aim for good "normal" macro game :| Is this why we seem to lose to koreans?
Koreans take more risks to win, Europeans play more straight-up. This is the main thing seperating them, since Koreans take more risks, overall they are more successful to a degree.
Hey everyone. With the big news of map release and the overwhelming response on Team Liquid, I thought I'd repost some of the communities thoughts. I'll say outright that most opinions are negative so far. I chose who to quote by their activity in the community and not based on opinions or races. Enclosed in the spoiler are lots of quotes.
On June 21 2011 01:35 chenchen wrote: Give me a ring when Blizzard makes some maps that aren't complete crap.
Maps that are purposely designed for one base rushes? Seriously . . .
On June 21 2011 01:32 Torte de Lini wrote: 1st map looks really cool. The other one looks like they took the same map and played boggle and reassembled the pieces. Some of these are just terrible .__.
On June 21 2011 01:31 Telcontar wrote: At least Blizzard is being consistent with their obnoxiousness. That is all I can say about that.
On June 21 2011 01:24 neobowman wrote: Notice how new Blizzard maps aren't being used in GSL? I think tournaments should stop using ladder maps.
On June 21 2011 01:20 Drazerk wrote: As long as they block close spawns I will be happy
The maps look cool but I don't like the first one at all
On June 21 2011 01:20 iamho wrote: Close rush distances and hard to take third bases. why the hell is blizzard so obsessed with rushing???
edit: crap wasted 2000th post
On June 21 2011 01:19 ondik wrote: I don't like mindless bashing, but the distance between bases seems VERY short. No way can you go into longer game with down+down or up+up positions in first three maps and even with cross positions spawn only it will be hard.. well let's hope I'm wrong
On June 21 2011 01:54 Elefanto wrote: all are looking completely terrible why are they refusing to listen to the community and remove all the horrible maps in the pool (80%) and add GSL maps? Goddamnit.
On June 21 2011 01:55 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: Wow, GREAT JOB BLIZZARD!
I'm glad these maps, on first glance, actually look fairly "standard" unlike the maps they showed us last season which all looked glaringly bad (except for Shattered and maybe Backwater Gulch).
I'm still disappointed in how their Normal maps still seem a bit small, but I guess I will have to actually play on them to see how big they are.
Hurray for no close positions! That is, not super close, at least. Not like Shatterd or Metal. Great job!
The 1v1 Maps look definitely playable, and the team maps look great too (shared bases ftw!)
On June 21 2011 01:55 See.Blue wrote: I'd love to say 'lets wait and see how these pan out' but all the 1v1 maps look particularly underwhelming
On June 21 2011 01:59 DeltruS wrote: I don't think Blizzard realizes that rush maps should not exist because the game is balanced for large maps. There are things players can flat out lose to without scouting, and with these maps they player can't even build reactionary units.
Not only this, but a large amount of strategies have limited map control. This means that taking a third is impossible for that large amount of builds. The problem isn't with the build makers, but with Blizzard. They don't give players units for area denial. They encourage "rush" plays that don't give the defender an advantage.
The game doesn't need to be tuned for casuals. The matchmaking system allows them to play at a lower level. Getting a third is a thousand times easier than building exactly what they need to defend the opponents hidden, cheesy tactics.
On June 21 2011 02:19 Megaliskuu wrote: I'm anticipating the maps that will be removed far more than these maps that are getting added, they are pretty bad.....
On June 21 2011 02:51 skipdog172 wrote: What is even the point of these short maps? Is there ANYBODY in the community that likes them?
Doesn't pretty much everybody in the community want big macro maps?
I like variety. I don't want huge macro maps every game. Some certainly, but not all.
On June 21 2011 02:58 FaCE_1 wrote: dam, I really don't like the 2v2 and 3v3 map..
SPECIALLY the second 2v2 map, it's just pure awful
On June 21 2011 03:15 Zelniq wrote: i like how map 2 is basically backwater gulch on crack.. walk 2 feet from your own natural platform and you're at your enemy's nat platform lol. at least the center doesnt suck anymore like backwater's did though. im assuming they'll change the ramp to the main as well as it seems too easy to avoid any defense youve put at your natural and waltz into your main
On June 21 2011 03:23 Zelniq wrote: well those gold expos are the reason why map 3's layout sucks, if they removed that, or shoved it more over to the outskirts, there'd be some nice areas to fight in and just make for an overall better map layout. i dont know why blizzard is so obsessed with having some maps have no wide open areas at all
On June 21 2011 03:45 Chill wrote: These maps, especially the 1v1 maps, made me fall asleep.
On June 21 2011 03:47 Ribbon wrote: The first reaction I had to this was "Ugh".
The more I look at it, though, the more it becomes "enh"
Test Map 1 is okay. I like that they forgot to name it. Rotational symmetry helps keep the rush distances okay.
Kerrigan's Wrath is fucking absurd. Close spawns are actually worse than Steppes. Like, a lot worse.
Shattered Sky is probably fine. It reminds me a little of Metalopolis.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, I'm okay with the Macro Map.
So, that's two enh maps, one pretty decent one, and one fucking awful one. I guess it depends on what maps they remove to make room. If they remove, for instance, Slag, Scrap, Delta, and Typhon, I guess I'm okay with this.
On June 21 2011 03:51 -orb- wrote: These maps look terrible
I sure hope I'm wrong
Not nearly enough vetoes for all the crap blizzard puts in the ladder pool
On June 21 2011 04:10 WniO wrote: very cool stuff.
On June 21 2011 04:15 Zapdos_Smithh wrote: Blizzard should just put rocks everywhere for all the maps. Your natural will have rocks in it, your RAMP will have fucking rocks, your GAS will be covered in rocks, every single expansion will have rocks in it, if you want to access watch towers you need to kill rocks, and every single path in the map will be stopped by rocks.
Zerg, Terran, and Protoss' worst enemies aren't each other, they are rocks. Who would have thought that intergalactic war in the future with all of it's technologies will still be troubled by rocks.
On June 21 2011 04:25 BigFan wrote: Gotta love how people will keep on complaining about maps regardless of whether the maps are good or bad. Personally, I think these maps are fine as is. Once the community gets a chance to play on them, we can then determine how good of maps they are. Nice to see more open areas in the middle and being able to double exp on map 4 sounds great :D
On June 21 2011 04:29 MonsieurGrimm wrote: We'll see how they turn out I guess, so far my optimism is crushed though :/
On June 21 2011 04:32 ZeromuS wrote: My issue is mainly with the first and third maps. On the sky map I think that banshees from Terran will completely destroy. Think about the open space behind the main and the long distance between the mineral line on the natural and the mineral line on the main for any infantry to traverse to deal with banshees :/
On June 21 2011 04:39 iCCup.Diamond wrote: Hmmm looking at the new maps now. They seem to be going in the right direction . Still too many rocks for my taste but to each their own.
I am actually excited to try out 1v1 Test4, it looks interesting.
On June 21 2011 04:44 grobo wrote: Seems decent in my opinion, just wish they would stop with all the destructible rocks.
On June 21 2011 04:44 MrCon wrote: After taking a close look at those maps, I think they're not that bad. Actually, I think they could be good. Even the rush map is not that rush happy, because you have a good choke to defend and an easy 3rd. I think I really like all those maps in fact, for the first time I'm actually in a hurry to play those maps.
On June 21 2011 05:33 travis wrote: God damn people are negative LOL
I guess I am not as amazing at telling what the maps mean as you guys since I have no clue if these are good or bad yet.
Generally a negative response, but of course only time will tell if opinions remain unchanged.
On June 21 2011 07:18 rebuffering wrote: I really hope they put the PTR up soon, im praying that the maps are much bigger than they look.
I 100% agree. I really hate how Blizzard is dipping their toes into more 'casual' maps instead of making balanced maps, they want to spice up the game with maps that are imbalanced...
Dipping their toes is the understatement of the year. It's their directive to have ladder maps that cater to casuals.. though I'm not sure exactly what that's supposed to mean. I'm a platinum level player and I don't consider myself casual, just a bad player that still has much to learn. In recent memory I've seen high templar only twice in late games. All of my ZvPs are early/mid game rushes. 90% of my ZvTs are centered around the 10 minute marine tank. ZvZ strangely enough goes late game more than the others.
I don't know who Blizz means when they say casual. Or what they mean when they say rush map.
With the new maps for Ladder season 3 coming out I started to wonder when the next season is planned to be released? I remember reading that they want to have decently short seasons, but has it been said anywhere when it will actually start?
On June 21 2011 11:46 Probe1 wrote: Dipping their toes is the understatement of the year. It's their directive to have ladder maps that cater to casuals.. though I'm not sure exactly what that's supposed to mean. I'm a platinum level player and I don't consider myself casual, just a bad player that still has much to learn. In recent memory I've seen high templar only twice in late games. All of my ZvPs are early/mid game rushes. 90% of my ZvTs are centered around the 10 minute marine tank. ZvZ strangely enough goes late game more than the others.
I don't know who Blizz means when they say casual. Or what they mean when they say rush map.
I think Bronze - Diamond and even some Master players can be considered casual in the sense of being a non-professional player. A regular player who don't plays professionally would then be considered a casual gamer, too. Casual in this sense does not only cover someone who normally plays Farmville.
On June 21 2011 11:46 Probe1 wrote: Dipping their toes is the understatement of the year. It's their directive to have ladder maps that cater to casuals.. though I'm not sure exactly what that's supposed to mean. I'm a platinum level player and I don't consider myself casual, just a bad player that still has much to learn. In recent memory I've seen high templar only twice in late games. All of my ZvPs are early/mid game rushes. 90% of my ZvTs are centered around the 10 minute marine tank. ZvZ strangely enough goes late game more than the others.
I don't know who Blizz means when they say casual. Or what they mean when they say rush map.
It really makes no sense whatsoever. In my experience, casual players hate getting rushed more than pretty much anything. So short distance maps are supposed to appeal to casual players according to Blizzard? Their position is so blatantly in the face of reason that it's absurd.
On June 21 2011 11:46 Probe1 wrote: Dipping their toes is the understatement of the year. It's their directive to have ladder maps that cater to casuals.. though I'm not sure exactly what that's supposed to mean. I'm a platinum level player and I don't consider myself casual, just a bad player that still has much to learn. In recent memory I've seen high templar only twice in late games. All of my ZvPs are early/mid game rushes. 90% of my ZvTs are centered around the 10 minute marine tank. ZvZ strangely enough goes late game more than the others.
I don't know who Blizz means when they say casual. Or what they mean when they say rush map.
It really makes no sense whatsoever. In my experience, casual players hate getting rushed more than pretty much anything. So short distance maps are supposed to appeal to casual players according to Blizzard? Their position is so blatantly in the face of reason that it's absurd.
It is not. Most casual gamers I know hate to get rushed, but love to rush. (Won with a rush = smart strategy decision, lost to a rush = imbalanced unit or opponent's abuse of a no-skill strategy.)
Smaller maps are easier to understand. Casual gamers (including me) feel lost on maps which are too large. The scouting takes more time (which we are already bad at) and map control is harder to maintain.
I honestly think that balancing maps around low level (ie casual) game play is as silly as balancing units and races around low level play. Rush distances don't really come into play in low leagues since people's builds and timings are all over the place. I'm a casual gamer in the sense that i play 2-3 games a day, but i still find ridicolous that a map forces me to do something. If i scout that my opponent is being greedy and then decide to "go f-ing kill him" with an all-in, that's fine, but being forced into 1-2 base all-ins because on some maps 3 bases are impossible to hold is downright silly.
Hello, im a kinda new SC2 player and need a bit of help cause to be perfectly honest im terrible, beyond awful haha, so yeah was wondering if anyone new of any skype group or vent server where i could talk to some people and get some useful tips on how to play and things?
On June 21 2011 22:48 Xavier_18 wrote: Hello, im a kinda new SC2 player and need a bit of help cause to be perfectly honest im terrible, beyond awful haha, so yeah was wondering if anyone new of any skype group or vent server where i could talk to some people and get some useful tips on how to play and things?
Browse the website, especially liquipedia. Look for strategy forum posts with a lot of replies that are highlighted in blue (which indicates the poster provides sound advice) of standard builds vs each race and practice those forever.
On June 21 2011 22:48 Xavier_18 wrote: Hello, im a kinda new SC2 player and need a bit of help cause to be perfectly honest im terrible, beyond awful haha, so yeah was wondering if anyone new of any skype group or vent server where i could talk to some people and get some useful tips on how to play and things?
Bronze Practice chat channel on EU, there's people from every league that will help you. http://sc2practice.com/ here is the community's website. Also look up the recommended threads in the strategy section, there's a lot of good information. To start off, read http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/StarCraft It's about Brood War, but it's a decent introduction to terminology etc Also, welcome to the Starcraft community
On June 21 2011 22:48 Xavier_18 wrote: Hello, im a kinda new SC2 player and need a bit of help cause to be perfectly honest im terrible, beyond awful haha, so yeah was wondering if anyone new of any skype group or vent server where i could talk to some people and get some useful tips on how to play and things?
Yes, while better players still can be at fault and give some wrong advise, I think the best thing to get into the game is to play with (and against) others while being able to talk to them. This is way more fun than to read or watch guides. I have contact to some guys, most are better than me, some are worse, but we all agree that playing Starcraft is fun. The only difficult step is to get the first skype contact.
I get much help with practice games to try out some timings, I also gave some help for example to explain how to defend a sixpool as protoss. Sometimes I also watch my replay or a replay of a friend together. Sometimes we do 1v1 custom matches while the other guys in Skype observe. I think the social aspect of the game is the best.
Instead of caring too much about lore and terminology for now, it is more fun to play versus people you can talk to.
I'm curious, why zergs (GM and pro level) are not using more unit types per game, especialy vs protoss. They always go for ling into roach/hydra, or roach into roach/corruptor, or ling/hydra, or roach/infestor. You need only ONE building to make unit's from all your hatches, why i don't see ling/roach/hydra/infestor/corruptor. Obviously you aren't going to get as much of every unit but ONE building to allow yourself getting few units IS NOT a big investment, especialy if you are creating more flexible and less vunerable to counters unit composition. Other races have to scale production buildings with units they want to make. For example, protoss have to build 10+ gateways, 2+ robos in late game +whatever more robos/stargates he decides to go for, but zergs refuse to build more than 3-4 types of units and then they are complaining how those poor compositions are weak and vunerable. This is like the most underused feature of zerg race and at the same time, one of most powerfull zerg features.
(and don't say it's expensive, i'm tired of people saying that getting more than 2 types of unit's is "expensive" while in reality all tech structures have similar cost and you only need 1 of each)
The reason everyone says expensive is because it is. It's cost prohibitive to have an effective amount of hydras, infestors and corruptors at the same time before 20 minutes. Late game? Sure we need to diversify our forces a little more, I can see that. But between 10-20 minutes all of our gas is going straight into roaches/corruptors/infestors just to stay alive.
On June 22 2011 02:52 Probe1 wrote: The reason everyone says expensive is because it is. It's cost prohibitive to have an effective amount of hydras, infestors and corruptors at the same time before 20 minutes. Late game? Sure we need to diversify our forces a little more, I can see that. But between 10-20 minutes all of our gas is going straight into roaches/corruptors/infestors just to stay alive.
I fail to see how 1 less mutalisk is going to be a big deal with exchange for infestation pit. And i'm talking about adding it @ 15+ min mark, because in early game it can be significant cost, but not when you are on 3 bases. (because you don't need to get high count of mutas for harass, or high count of hydras to increase dps behind roaches and lings, or high count of infestors to cover entire ball of protoss units with 2 fungals)
On June 22 2011 04:04 Egyptian_Head wrote: Is it possible to get hallucinate in time to scout a quick darkshrine (5:50ish) in a pvp if your opponent goes fast DT's?
If not do I pretty much have to go Robo tech pvp?
You play protoss and don't know that chronoed warpgate finishes around 5:50 (which means you can get hallu that early only if you dont get WG)? -.-' Robo counters DT's and blink stalkers so it's the best choice imo.
On June 22 2011 04:04 Egyptian_Head wrote: Is it possible to get hallucinate in time to scout a quick darkshrine (5:50ish) in a pvp if your opponent goes fast DT's?
If not do I pretty much have to go Robo tech pvp?
You play protoss and don't know that chronoed warpgate finishes around 5:50 (which means you can get hallu that early only if you dont get WG)? -.-' Robo counters DT's and blink stalkers so it's the best choice imo.
Did I mention I swoped to Protoss today and Im basically bronze? Explains why I didn't know that, thanks. I prefer using the stargate but I guess sacrifices must be made as People are sending DT's at me every pvp.
Hey guys! Just had a quick question and didn't know where else to post it. My brother's looking to check out the game before (possibly) buying it and wants to give the campaign a try, could I let him log onto my bnet account from his computer? He lives in a different house from me and I just don't wanna get banned by Blizzard for account sharing.
(obv we couldn't be online at the same time but that shouldn't be a problem)
On June 22 2011 09:20 DogBite wrote: Hey guys! Just had a quick question and didn't know where else to post it. My brother's looking to check out the game before (possibly) buying it and wants to give the campaign a try, could I let him log onto my bnet account from his computer? He lives in a different house from me and I just don't wanna get banned by Blizzard for account sharing.
(obv we couldn't be online at the same time but that shouldn't be a problem)
So today I was laddering quite a bit and went like 8-2, so I was having a really good day overall on ladder.
Well my last game I won and was promoted to Gold.(Yippe!) However, I'm the only person in my division and after a few relogs and about an hour of waiting, no one else is in my division.
Is this a glitch in the Blizzard database or will my division soon fill up?
On June 22 2011 09:20 Goldfish wrote: I have a question does anyone know what the SC2 intro music is called? For example, you can hear the music here+ Show Spoiler +
1) What is it that actually makes a good Starcraft II player?
I myself have established several key principles to playing RTS games here, I want to know what everyone else's opinions on my observations are and get any feedback on if I missed anything out:
Macro - Namely your ability to produce workers, buildings and units and keep your money low. I'm not trying to incite a flame war here but I think this part is hugely overstated as an "easy solution" by the SC2 community for explaining how a player should improve because I feel that it's not exactly hard to build as Day[9] calls a "mental checklist" of what to build and what to produce and then doing it.
Scouting - It is important to have a good read on what your opponent is doing, if that means suiciding a small amount of units or scanning the main base, then so be it, just for that knowledge that he is either expanding, transitioning or building up an army and getting ready to all-in you.
Tactics - Whether that be flanking (moving a portion of the army to attack from a different angle), surrounding, or abusing the terrain (higher ground, choke points etc)
Micro - Smartly controlling units in order to gain an advantage in a specific battle. Think marine splitting when they alone are about to face a huge baneling bust or surrounding an army in forcefields to prevent a retreat etc.
Harassment - Small scale, mobile attack intended to damage the opponent's economy, production or technology.
2) As an EU Silver player (who has been beating Gold and Platinum levelled players and is aiming to get to a Master league level), should I just continue to focus on macro as the #1 priority seeing as it's the advice that everybody just throws at me above anything else, because I feel like my macro whilst far from flawless isn't exactly terrible either?
Or should I be focusing on the other elements of gameplay I listed above (or any others I missed out here)
It's just that I feel disillusioned with focusing just on macro, I feel like I'm not being very active in the game when I'm just focusing solely on getting more units than my opponent.
3) What is better, grinding out the ladder and playing loads of games on there almost non-stop with little breaks or huge amounts of self-analysis on replays with little amounts of laddering?
Macro alone will bring you towards Diamond. But you seem to already know what you need to improve on, on the correct order too.
So first, as you become more comfortable with strong macro, try starting to scout as well. As you play more you'll start noticing timings on when are good times to scout.
Then as you get better, you can start to think about tactics and harassment WHILE macroing and scouting. The hard part is doing all of them. A good player is able to harass with micro while not falling too behind on macro as well. Take it one step at a time.
Macro alone will bring you towards Diamond. But you seem to already know what you need to improve on, on the correct order too.
So first, as you become more comfortable with strong macro, try starting to scout as well. As you play more you'll start noticing timings on when are good times to scout.
Then as you get better, you can start to think about tactics and harassment WHILE macroing and scouting. The hard part is doing all of them. A good player is able to harass with micro while not falling too behind on macro as well. Take it one step at a time.
While I am not disregarding your advice, I just feel disillusioned about whether I am improving at the pace I actually want to.
Namely, I feel like I face players in my league with equal or better macro, no matter how much I try to improve and I'm trying to get a competitive edge over them. I started playing actively since around December (playing a few games a day on 1v1 ladder) and feel myself improve at a slow pace.
In season 1, I played around 550 games, around 270 of which I won. I pushed myself from a win/loss ratio where I had over 40 more losses to just around 5 more losses. And despite having overcome such a huge loss streak, I felt demotivated that I was still in Bronze and was almost 1200 points above the 2nd place competitior by the time Season 1 had ended.
Yet, it wasn't until well into Season 2 (just over a month ago) that I actually got my Silver promotion. Since then, my play has been delayed a bit because of exams but since then I've done a few games a day on ladder and have faced against and beaten Silver, Gold and even the token Platinum player.
That's right, it took me several months of grinding hundreds of ladder games to hit the Silver League and if I remember correctly, Silver is the second worst league currently existing in the game out of around 7 leagues (Bronze, Silver, Gold, Platinum, Diamond, Master and Grandmaster.).
And despite this, I feel somewhat comfortable with my macro and I feel like I can execute several well known builds not perfectly bu certainly a few seconds off of optimal (i.e. Ice Fisher, 14 pool 14 gas, 3 base roach hydra transition, and even once baneling drops etc)
However, I feel like at this rate I will never improve to a Diamond or even Master League level until after months, even years of playing the game, at which point HOTS or even LOTV would be out.
The point I'm making is should I focus on incorporating drops, harassment, aggressive scouting, better micro in huge fights etc into my play but at the same time practice macroing during it?
If I want to actually be one of the top 20% of active players (assuming that's how the bracket system works) and hit Diamond, should I continue to do what I do now or am I doing it wrong? Note that most Diamond or above players completely roll over me.
just wondering about 2 units, that are fairly similer, but arent overly used.
auto turrets and infested marines
WHY do auto turrets last so long? is the trade off that they cant move? its not a huge issue, but infested terrans take time to spawn, move slow as shit off creep, and dont last very long, auto turrents spawn instantly, last so long that if they arent getting killed its rare, and cant move at all.
anyone else have some thoughts on that? maybe its an acceptable trade off, Im not sure I agree though.
On June 22 2011 11:48 Taelshin wrote: just wondering about 2 units, that are fairly similer, but arent overly used.
auto turrets and infested marines
WHY do auto turrets last so long? is the trade off that they cant move? its not a huge issue, but infested terrans take time to spawn, move slow as shit off creep, and dont last very long, auto turrents spawn instantly, last so long that if they arent getting killed its rare, and cant move at all.
anyone else have some thoughts on that? maybe its an acceptable trade off, Im not sure I agree though.
The mobility may be it. Also, I'd say it's a good trade-off considering Point Defense Drones don't last that long, Seeker Missile is utter crap considering the research and energy cost and many Zergs perfer to use Fungal Growth on a large clump of weaker units or Neural Parasite on a large unit to really wreck havoc rather than use Infested Terrans any day of the week.
Also, Spawn Infested Terran can be used whilst the Infestor is burrowed (furthermore, Infestors are one of only two units apart from Roaches upgraded with Tunneling Claws that can move whilst burrowed.)
This effectively lets them do some DT-esque harassment upon a mineral line, which only having a large force turtle the mineral line (not necessarily siege tanks that can splash damage harm their own side's SCVs) or detection can truly negate.
ahhh some great points, totally forgot that fact that can be casted well burrowed. Id like to cancel out the burrow and ravens being a flying unit, how ever those were good points. Honestly I like both units,I think there good ideas, and will see some great use in the future! (I hope!)
Another thing to think about with infested terran is that you can get so many of them at once, while the most auto-turrets I've seen in an actual game is 5 or so. Not saying one is better than another just something to think about. Now for my question: I tried the search function with no luck, so I'll just ask it here: Do the wins required to get a portrait (ex: 250 wins for a ghost) carry from season to season? It seems like it would be near impossible to get some portriats playing with only 3 or 4 months worth of laddering before it was reset.
Don't know how widely known this is, but for Terran, you don't actually have to shift-click your SCVs back to the minerals; you can simply click. This goes for any action: while they're building, you can issue the next command (ie building another supply depot) without holding shift, and it'll automatically queue up. Not game-changing or anything, but it's much easier to just click rather than holding shift every time you want to make sure your SCVs are going back to work.
On June 22 2011 14:12 WorkerRush21 wrote: Another thing to think about with infested terran is that you can get so many of them at once, while the most auto-turrets I've seen in an actual game is 5 or so. Not saying one is better than another just something to think about. Now for my question: I tried the search function with no luck, so I'll just ask it here: Do the wins required to get a portrait (ex: 250 wins for a ghost) carry from season to season? It seems like it would be near impossible to get some portriats playing with only 3 or 4 months worth of laddering before it was reset.
It's pretty obvious wins carry over between seasons. Reduce your statement down to it's near impossible. But a lot of people have them. So it must not be near impossible. There must be a logical reason why it is not near impossible. Wins must carry over. Actually this is just shit logic, the answer is wins carry over between seasons. I'm sorry I'm exhausted and extremely bm mood.
The key differences between auto turrets and infested terrans are these: Infested terrans last only 30 seconds versus an auto turret lasting 180//240 seconds. Infested Terrans cost 25 energy (8 per full energy infestor) versus the 50 for an auto turret (4 per raven). This is offset by the much longer duration of an auto turret with gray area considering the next line Infested Terrans can move slowly and auto turrets can not. Also, it is easier to place multiple infested terrans while auto turrets take up a considerable footprint. Combined with their immobile nature, it makes them harder to quickly mass up. Infestors have already been explored much more than Ravens and their other abilities are acclaimed with usefulness, while the Raven has a very situational PDD and a missile affectionately referred to as High School Musical. Further note on the production unit- you could say raven's are more fragile than infestors, lacking the ability to burrow.
Auto turrets are cool little area of denial and disposable units, while infested terrans make excellent harassment or even damage tanking and dealing units for a close battle where fungal/NP would be excessive or ineffective.
They do the same amount of damage and they can be used for similar purposes. They're also produced from units that have no direct attack.
This has been my 5th grade report on Raven's and Infestors. Thank you for listening.
Macro alone will bring you towards Diamond. But you seem to already know what you need to improve on, on the correct order too.
So first, as you become more comfortable with strong macro, try starting to scout as well. As you play more you'll start noticing timings on when are good times to scout.
Then as you get better, you can start to think about tactics and harassment WHILE macroing and scouting. The hard part is doing all of them. A good player is able to harass with micro while not falling too behind on macro as well. Take it one step at a time.
While I am not disregarding your advice, I just feel disillusioned about whether I am improving at the pace I actually want to.
Namely, I feel like I face players in my league with equal or better macro, no matter how much I try to improve and I'm trying to get a competitive edge over them. I started playing actively since around December (playing a few games a day on 1v1 ladder) and feel myself improve at a slow pace.
In season 1, I played around 550 games, around 270 of which I won. I pushed myself from a win/loss ratio where I had over 40 more losses to just around 5 more losses. And despite having overcome such a huge loss streak, I felt demotivated that I was still in Bronze and was almost 1200 points above the 2nd place competitior by the time Season 1 had ended.
Yet, it wasn't until well into Season 2 (just over a month ago) that I actually got my Silver promotion. Since then, my play has been delayed a bit because of exams but since then I've done a few games a day on ladder and have faced against and beaten Silver, Gold and even the token Platinum player.
That's right, it took me several months of grinding hundreds of ladder games to hit the Silver League and if I remember correctly, Silver is the second worst league currently existing in the game out of around 7 leagues (Bronze, Silver, Gold, Platinum, Diamond, Master and Grandmaster.).
And despite this, I feel somewhat comfortable with my macro and I feel like I can execute several well known builds not perfectly bu certainly a few seconds off of optimal (i.e. Ice Fisher, 14 pool 14 gas, 3 base roach hydra transition, and even once baneling drops etc)
However, I feel like at this rate I will never improve to a Diamond or even Master League level until after months, even years of playing the game, at which point HOTS or even LOTV would be out.
The point I'm making is should I focus on incorporating drops, harassment, aggressive scouting, better micro in huge fights etc into my play but at the same time practice macroing during it?
If I want to actually be one of the top 20% of active players (assuming that's how the bracket system works) and hit Diamond, should I continue to do what I do now or am I doing it wrong? Note that most Diamond or above players completely roll over me.
It took me about 50 games to get promoted from Bronze to Silver, and trust me, it's ALL about macro. All i did up to platinum was amove my army and then go back to macroing; sometimes you would even see my colossi shooting at buildings rather than units, while my minerals were around 100-200 because i was back in my base making more units, without even looking at the battle. To this day, just by macro alone im consistently 10-20 food ahead of my P/T opponents in Diamond (assuming no battles occur ofc), and about even with Zergs quite often; i still screw up in battles but often i end up ahead again because i remake my army faster. Until you see that you are clearly ahead in food/worker/army count in your replays against silver players, trust me, you gotta work on your macro first and foremost.
Any Masters Terrans got some solid mech replays for TvZ, I can't ever seem to get the ratio of tanks/thors the way I need it and if possible show some way to harass into the midgame? thanks!
On June 22 2011 19:45 kodas wrote: Any Masters Terrans got some solid mech replays for TvZ, I can't ever seem to get the ratio of tanks/thors the way I need it and if possible show some way to harass into the midgame? thanks!
Synystyr's TvZ 0/3 is the only solid mech play I know of, no mid game harass sorry
On June 23 2011 02:32 Blasterion wrote: When opening Mech, is 1/1/1 usually better or 1/2/0?
It depends if you'll be relying on air for banshee harass, medivac dropping, or viking support in your overall game plan. If you want a stronger ground force, just make sure you can handle air threats and skip the starport.
On June 23 2011 02:32 Blasterion wrote: When opening Mech, is 1/1/1 usually better or 1/2/0?
It depends if you'll be relying on air for banshee harass, medivac dropping, or viking support in your overall game plan. If you want a stronger ground force, just make sure you can handle air threats and skip the starport.
My game plan is like Blue flame drop=> hellion/tank into some Thors + Vikings. later get ghost tech to counter infestor/HTs (Trying to make a general purpose Mech build)
On June 22 2011 10:38 Clbull wrote: I got a few questions I was pondering in my head:
1) What is it that actually makes a good Starcraft II player?
I agree with your points on what to focus on.
The only thing I could add is sometimes it is good to get some advice from others that are really solid and can look at your games to give you areas where you think you are doing well but you are not.
I am in the same position as you. I had a few friends commenting on this and that but it wasn't untill I had a few training sessions with a very well spoken grandmaster did I realise that some of the things that I thought I was doing well were a big problem.
Just one example from your list - early game scouting, sure I would scout, look at their base, rough buildings etc etc. . In my mind I thought I was doing it very well. This coach pointed out that I was not looking carefully enough, I was not counting drones, looking at gas timings, building timings - and that I didn't have enough knowledge of when things should or should not be there in other races to change what I was doing. This was just one small thing in a multitude of issues.
There were also a bunch of other things I thought I was doing well that I really needed to look at and things that I either didn't know I was doing or didn't think were an issue.
So, the only thing I can say is to get someone else to analyse the way you play, whether by posting replays .. coaching .. or friends you have confidence in.
I am not getting lessons now... but still have so much info and things to work on it should keep me going for a while.
While attacking a building in production (and close to completion) how can you tell if you destroyed the building or if it was cancelled? My question applies to all races.
For example, for zerg you can see the drone when it's cancelled, but are there any other indicators?
On June 23 2011 13:28 TunaSC wrote: While attacking a building in production (and close to completion) how can you tell if you destroyed the building or if it was cancelled? My question applies to all races.
For example, for zerg you can see the drone when it's cancelled, but are there any other indicators?
Well, I know for Terran, that you can tell when something is destroyed if there is a dark black underneath the structure that is being attacked and there is continuous smoke for like 3-4 seconds or so. You can definitely be able to tell for Terran. As for Protoss, I dont think there is a way to tell
On June 23 2011 13:28 TunaSC wrote: While attacking a building in production (and close to completion) how can you tell if you destroyed the building or if it was cancelled? My question applies to all races.
For example, for zerg you can see the drone when it's cancelled, but are there any other indicators?
Well, I know for Terran, that you can tell when something is destroyed if there is a dark black underneath the structure that is being attacked and there is continuous smoke for like 3-4 seconds or so. You can definitely be able to tell for Terran. As for Protoss, I dont think there is a way to tell
Fir Protoss the warp in shatters and falls to the floor
[QUOTE]On June 05 2011 21:18 Serelitz wrote: [QUOTE]On June 05 2011 21:15 Bleak wrote: Does anyone know why Irradiate was removed? I think if Ravens still had that, they would see use. I just don't understand the decision for it. Is it because of the clumping effect being stronger in SC2?[/QUOTE]
I don't know what this ability is, but considering that Ravens don't see allot of use as a mobile detector I think it would be nice for them to have an ability that would make a difference in a a big fight.
hey, can anyone tell me how to play sc2 offline. i keep bumping into the login battle.net screen, and i don't really want to login and stuff. i just want to play sc2 like sc broad war. can anyone help me please?
On June 23 2011 15:51 Marik Grabowski wrote: hey, can anyone tell me how to play sc2 offline. i keep bumping into the login battle.net screen, and i don't really want to login and stuff. i just want to play sc2 like sc broad war. can anyone help me please?
as long as you have a b.net account (1 time registration and login) you can simply play in offline mode : minus achievements and PvP MP.
If you dont have an account then you have pirated the game and the blizzard police wont be too happy about that.
Not exactly, i've had internet down sometime and wanting to play offline sc2 but i couldn't since it needed to be "authenticated" but i logged on every day before that..
I've got a question - I'm completely new to Starcraft, I just finished watching the Dreamhack tournament and suddenly feel like playing Starcraft but I'm sort of leery about getting into the ladders because I'm pretty terrible - I'm 27 years old and I'm typically not very good at strategy games (I'm more of a game "Voyeur") but I would really like to learn to play this game well. So I guess what I'm asking - is there any hope for me, being so old to start and am I going to get slaughtered in the ladders or are there a solid group of players in the same boat as me?
Thanks in advance for any answers I'm sorry if this was discussed before but I couldn't find anything in the search.
On June 24 2011 05:54 Dog-Meat wrote: I've got a question - I'm completely new to Starcraft, I just finished watching the Dreamhack tournament and suddenly feel like playing Starcraft but I'm sort of leery about getting into the ladders because I'm pretty terrible - I'm 27 years old and I'm typically not very good at strategy games (I'm more of a game "Voyeur") but I would really like to learn to play this game well. So I guess what I'm asking - is there any hope for me, being so old to start and am I going to get slaughtered in the ladders or are there a solid group of players in the same boat as me?
Thanks in advance for any answers I'm sorry if this was discussed before but I couldn't find anything in the search.
Also Go Huk and Go Canada!
Ladder will place you between people of your level after a couple of games. The first ±10 will probably include some experienced players who will slaughter you, but after that it gets easier
Hey I'm a silver league protoss and wanting to switch to terran. I've tried terran but just get fustrated that I can't win. I wonder if anyone had any tips
Toastie is dead on. For a long time you'll get absolutely MURDERED by everyone. It's the initiation process most people go through. You'll get better in obvious ways like learning how to constantly produce scvs and you'll get better in subtle ways that you won't even realize. The best advice? Play constantly, put your name in the Practice Partner thread here for people to practice with at your level,
Recommended Threads here in the strategy section is also a really great resource to new players.
But nothing will help as much as just playing.
Good luck, half fun and welcome to (non lurking) Team liquid!
On June 24 2011 06:10 muffinmanSteff wrote: Hey I'm a silver league protoss and wanting to switch to terran. I've tried terran but just get fustrated that I can't win. I wonder if anyone had any tips
On June 24 2011 06:27 Dog-Meat wrote: Thank you both a ton - Loving the community here and I can't wait until I am able to contribute to it in some meaningful way!
Gaming is a passion. As long as you have a drive there is a way.
Like a old saying goes
Lim Yo Han didn't become the emperor over one night
There is also another saying
But he became the emperor eventually anyways.
Now I know you aren't BoxeR but hard work and motivation is what it really counts
Or Rome wasn't built in a day I love team liquid. It's just the right blend of multi cultural and focused around one passion.
On June 24 2011 06:27 Dog-Meat wrote: Thank you both a ton - Loving the community here and I can't wait until I am able to contribute to it in some meaningful way!
Hang out, post, talk to people in blogs, laugh on the automated ban list, scream with fans and haters on live report threads, stalk Hot_Bid; Team Liquid is a city, there's a place for you too
On June 24 2011 05:54 Dog-Meat wrote: I've got a question - I'm completely new to Starcraft, I just finished watching the Dreamhack tournament and suddenly feel like playing Starcraft but I'm sort of leery about getting into the ladders because I'm pretty terrible - I'm 27 years old and I'm typically not very good at strategy games (I'm more of a game "Voyeur") but I would really like to learn to play this game well. So I guess what I'm asking - is there any hope for me, being so old to start and am I going to get slaughtered in the ladders or are there a solid group of players in the same boat as me?
Thanks in advance for any answers I'm sorry if this was discussed before but I couldn't find anything in the search.
Also Go Huk and Go Canada!
Never to late to learn something new, all you have to do is apply yourself! Tune into players streams, day9 and really try and understand why they do what they do. Remember, at heart, this is an economy game first and foremost. The only way to get good at anything is to do it a ton, go for it! And good luck :D
for a while i was thinking about something like a Thor expand then transition into a mech oriented build. My reasoning is that Thors are excellent counter to Banshee and hellion openings and are almost on equal footing to marine tank openings. Instead of rushing thor and attacking use it as a defensive tech advantage and expand.
That sounds like a good idea. Of course turning feces into meat sounds like a.. well horrifying but beneficial idea. How would it stack up against each of the openings used in the last GSL final? Would 1 1 1 hellion harass with a medivac abuse the mobility of a thor too much?
You should develop it to a point where you could share it in strategy then make a [D] thread and get Terran players input
Question for you, does the "Find Match" button in SC2 every connect you to custom matches? I just played a match where a guy said he had set up a "Non-rush" practice custom match and I joined it with the "Find Match" button but all I am doing is laddering. How could this be possible?
He was really mad when I beat him that is why I am wondering, and I am not out to tick people off just play. Is there a way I can make sure I am only Laddering?
Also how long do I have to be at rank one of my division before it will bump me to the next division, currently rank 1 bronze division, and I have being consistently beating rank 10 and up Silver league people? Is it a random division bump or what?
On June 24 2011 22:48 DarkCount wrote: Hi i was wondering if it is posible if u can take diamond from first 5 placementh games or platinum is max ? Atm i make only team games and im master.
On June 24 2011 22:48 DarkCount wrote: Hi i was wondering if it is posible if u can take diamond from first 5 placementh games or platinum is max ? Atm i make only team games and im master.
Hey, has anyone noticed when it is that Artosis tends to stream, or has he stopped at the moment? I haven't seen him on in a while, but maybe he only streams at the wrong time of day for me.
You cant get masters the first time you ever place, however you can when playing your placement match after a previous Season. For example I won all 5 placement matches my first time ever and got into platinum. At the end of season 1 I was diamond. I the lost my first placement match at the beginning of Season 2 and was promoted to masters because my MMR (match making rating) was high enough for me to be re-ranked.
On June 25 2011 01:09 Jackbo wrote: Hey, has anyone noticed when it is that Artosis tends to stream, or has he stopped at the moment? I haven't seen him on in a while, but maybe he only streams at the wrong time of day for me.
At the moment he's on vacation with Tasteless in Cambodia. He's probably too busy fighting tigers and making mai tai's to stream
On June 24 2011 22:07 zantax wrote: Question for you, does the "Find Match" button in SC2 every connect you to custom matches? I just played a match where a guy said he had set up a "Non-rush" practice custom match and I joined it with the "Find Match" button but all I am doing is laddering. How could this be possible?
He was really mad when I beat him that is why I am wondering, and I am not out to tick people off just play. Is there a way I can make sure I am only Laddering?
Also how long do I have to be at rank one of my division before it will bump me to the next division, currently rank 1 bronze division, and I have being consistently beating rank 10 and up Silver league people? Is it a random division bump or what?
Thanks.
Your opponent was incorrect. There's no connection between Find Match and custom matches. He was either trolling, terribly mistaken or (.002% probability) there was a glitch in the matrix and he was somehow put against a ladder opponent.
Actually it's less than .002.
No way.
I'll link you the ladder guide. though I don't think it'll help. It's been my experience that being promoted means a new division opened up for you to be slotted in. Or maybe that's just my excuse for being stuck at the top of platinum for nearly a month, versing top 8 dia/master league players.. .. winning.. and still not being promoted.
On June 25 2011 02:54 Defilie wrote:
I wanna buy sc2 team t shirts or full outfit - like OGS team wears. Where do they sell them - considering i don't speak korean? Or some other team...
I've heard them say on GSL that other teams are looking into selling team shirts but other than ebay, at this current time I can't give you any links except the one already provided.
Does anyone know if there's a build order thread for the poltprime style 2rax vs toss (which he also used vs mma in the st gsl finals)? Can't seem to find it (it differs from the select 2 rax on liquipedia)
On June 25 2011 04:59 Schwopzi wrote: Does anyone know if there's a build order thread for the poltprime style 2rax vs toss (which he also used vs mma in the st gsl finals)? Can't seem to find it (it differs from the select 2 rax on liquipedia)
I haven't encountered one. I'll look for a replay of it though : I know what you're talking about. I'll make a thread if I find it.
On June 25 2011 01:09 Jackbo wrote: Hey, has anyone noticed when it is that Artosis tends to stream, or has he stopped at the moment? I haven't seen him on in a while, but maybe he only streams at the wrong time of day for me.
At the moment he's on vacation with Tasteless in Cambodia. He's probably too busy fighting tigers and making mai tai's to stream
On June 24 2011 22:07 zantax wrote: Question for you, does the "Find Match" button in SC2 every connect you to custom matches? I just played a match where a guy said he had set up a "Non-rush" practice custom match and I joined it with the "Find Match" button but all I am doing is laddering. How could this be possible?
He was really mad when I beat him that is why I am wondering, and I am not out to tick people off just play. Is there a way I can make sure I am only Laddering?
Also how long do I have to be at rank one of my division before it will bump me to the next division, currently rank 1 bronze division, and I have being consistently beating rank 10 and up Silver league people? Is it a random division bump or what?
Thanks.
Your opponent was incorrect. There's no connection between Find Match and custom matches. He was either trolling, terribly mistaken or (.002% probability) there was a glitch in the matrix and he was somehow put against a ladder opponent.
Actually it's less than .002.
No way.
I'll link you the ladder guide. though I don't think it'll help. It's been my experience that being promoted means a new division opened up for you to be slotted in. Or maybe that's just my excuse for being stuck at the top of platinum for nearly a month, versing top 8 dia/master league players.. .. winning.. and still not being promoted.
Please don't temp ban me, I was doing a parody of martyr//advertising, it's a link to you're own tshirt
I've heard them say on GSL that other teams are looking into selling team shirts but other than ebay, at this current time I can't give you any links except the one already provided.
lol it's not advertising if you link them to something they asked for, you wouldn't get banned for that
On June 25 2011 12:35 silencesc wrote: Anyone know when 1:00 AM KST is in PDT? I just signed up for the teamspeak open and dunno what time I need to check in....
I understand that you can download SC2 from your BNet account onto multiple PC's but my question is do you need the cd key to activate it on each seperate PC?
On June 25 2011 14:36 Skullflower wrote: I understand that you can download SC2 from your BNet account onto multiple PC's but my question is do you need the cd key to activate it on each seperate PC?
You only need the cd key to add SC2 to your Battle.net account. If you have a machine with SC2 on it, you can then play using your Bnet login.
On June 05 2011 21:15 Bleak wrote: Does anyone know why Irradiate was removed? I think if Ravens still had that, they would see use. I just don't understand the decision for it. Is it because of the clumping effect being stronger in SC2?
Irradiate damages the unit itself and all around it. That would be much too powerful with the new supersmart movement AI which allows very tight concentrations of units.
The seeker missile is its replacement, but not really worth it in its current stage, because its too easy to dodge and extremely expensive at 125 energy.
but you forget the main points. HSM is extremely COOL, and it's extremely EASY TO USE. that's what's most important in a strategy game.
On June 05 2011 23:13 Spartangy wrote: Do you guys know why some pro Zerg players recently, when just beginning the game, build up about 100 minerals instead of producing drones, and then produce drones? It's odd, I believe Tastosis (or was it Day9 and DjWheat?) pointed it out at MLG when IdrA and/or Losira did it, but I don't understand it. Anyone know what was up with that?
I think it has to do with larvae production after the first overlord, having the larvae come out more evenly instead of doing the extractor trick and instantly making 2 drones after the overlord pops, but I'm not sure, doesn't quite make sense.
it has to do with waiting for scouting info to come in, to decide whether to pop some drones, or pop some zerglings.
I am the only one asking what is going to happen with Jinro? He has gotten bad (for the proscene), and it's clearly not a tilt.
When you watch his games you realize he is not practicing the amount he should, his macro, his micro, his game sense. I'd like to know if he's planing to leave korea, or he wants to stop playing for a while or what. I know Haypro stopped playing when he wanted to stop trying for GSL (when I say stopped playing I mean he stopped training hard) and that's okay but I don't understand Jinro.
It's pretty sad because I was a big fan (who do I want to fool, I still am) of him and I don't know what he's thinking about. I know this sounds like a whine, and maybe it is, but I'd like to have a response from someone that is informed. It is painful to watch him lose every game and if I knew he had other plans I would be less concerned.
On the Chrome browser I can't see nested quotes and spoiler tags, it just brings me to the top of the page when I click it, its fine on my firefox but no sure how to fix it on chrome.
On June 27 2011 15:49 Chriscras wrote: Grubby vs Moon was in the first week of NASL, you have to have a subscription to watch the VODs.
Does anyone know what the animated smiley face raising a trophy means next to certain people's TL user names on their posts?
Hotbid has one next to his TL user name and I have seen it on other people's posts as well.
This user is a liquibet winner.
btw, I just wanted to say that now there is nothing else so important for me as a progaming fan than how far the foreigners will go in GSL. They are the only reason I watch it at all. August is going to be sick, but lets see HuK and Sheth winning.
May be a silly question as I am in bronze league but, can you make too many SCVs? It seems about every game I have about 90-95 scvs. Would it be better if I keep it at around 70-75 SCVs and build other things after that? Or do I continue to make SCVs at all times.
On June 28 2011 02:17 Bheka wrote: May be a silly question as I am in bronze league but, can you make too many SCVs? It seems about every game I have about 90-95 scvs. Would it be better if I keep it at around 70-75 SCVs and build other things after that? Or do I continue to make SCVs at all times.
90 SCVs are too many. Try only to go to about 70, that is ok. From pros I haven't seen 90 SCVs very often, only Zergs do that sometimes when they are very agressive.
On June 28 2011 02:17 Bheka wrote: May be a silly question as I am in bronze league but, can you make too many SCVs? It seems about every game I have about 90-95 scvs. Would it be better if I keep it at around 70-75 SCVs and build other things after that? Or do I continue to make SCVs at all times.
90 SCVs are too many. Try only to go to about 70, that is ok. From pros I haven't seen 90 SCVs very often, only Zergs do that sometimes when they are very agressive.
Its difficult to know when to stop making SCVs. I suppose Once I hit a 3rd expo no need to make any more SCVs or maybe when my main is mined out. Everything is so situational. I guess more experience and I will figure it out. Thank you for quick reply.
I've been experimenting with MorroW's ZvP which is basically an adjusted Spanishiwa build transitioning into Ling/BLing/Infestor with +2/+2 baneling drops and a lot of drop / counter attack antics in general.
While I like the build itself a lot, I am not too confident with the Infestor transition. You have to multitask a lot to make this build effective and not having your macro totally collapse is hard enough. Handling the infestors just seems to be a little bit too much for me. I've been trying to get Mutalisks (and eventually BLords and Cracklings) instead of Infestors to enhance the distractive side of this build in order to get more baneling drops going.
While I have had huge success with it, I am not too sure wether it's just my opponents being goldish level suckers as I myself or if it is a good idea to transition into Muta in general. Sometimes, my opponent just decides to do a desperation attack with all the stuff he has left and I find myself struggling against that if I spend most of my gas on Mutas instead of banelings.
Have you seen anyone... well, legit do this? I know MutaLing is a common style, especially Moon and July use them with great success, but I just love my little baneling shenanigans. So to sum the question up: is it viable? I would hate to learn to play that style successfully and find out that in retrospect I should just have sticked with something that actually works once I get promoted.
BTW: sorry if that's the wrong place to ask, I just felt that the strategy forum was the wrong place. A replay of one of my games is not gonna get me this question answered properly.
Just a quick question. When you get to play a PvsP on Metalopolis and are scared of cannon rushes, why don't players just put their 1st pylon behind their mineral line, as close as possible to the cliff. That way you can see the proxy pylon as soon as the cannon rusher places it.
I do that every time on Metalopolis and Xel'Naga Caverns.
So I'm looking into my control group setup and I think it needs to be reworked. Currently I use this:
1 - CC's 2 - Main Army 3 - Rax/Fact/Star 4 - Seconday Army 5 - Special units 6 to 0 - Upgrades / scouts, general purpose
I'm decently quick with these keybindings (around 100apm) but I'm finding my army control is lacking and this is going to be problematic, considering I threw production buildings inbetween my army bindings (2a4a5a?). I was reading old posts about pro/common setups, in which they generally use 1,2,3 army, 4,5,6 production, but after trying 1a2a3a and the other bindings with my production facilities, it didn't seem fluid at all for me.
What I'm considering doing is swapping 2 and 3, making 3 my whole army and bumping up the others 1 binding for the specific units bindings. It'd look like this:
1 - CC's 2 - Productions 3 - Whole army 4 - Main army 5 - Secondary army 6 - Special units 7 to 0 - General purpose
From here, I can tap 1,2,3, to peek through my production then land on my main army so I can keep them mobile, then when the fight comes I can simply shift my hand to 4,5,6 where 4a(t)5a6a feels a lot more natural. Thoughts?
On June 28 2011 18:07 nShade wrote: Just a quick question. When you get to play a PvsP on Metalopolis and are scared of cannon rushes, why don't players just put their 1st pylon behind their mineral line, as close as possible to the cliff. That way you can see the proxy pylon as soon as the cannon rusher places it.
I do that every time on Metalopolis and Xel'Naga Caverns.
Is there any reason not to? :S
i think some players do, incontrol mentioned and did it on his stream a few days ago i think. i guess cannon rushes aren't that common at that level of play though.
On June 28 2011 18:07 nShade wrote: Just a quick question. When you get to play a PvsP on Metalopolis and are scared of cannon rushes, why don't players just put their 1st pylon behind their mineral line, as close as possible to the cliff. That way you can see the proxy pylon as soon as the cannon rusher places it.
I do that every time on Metalopolis and Xel'Naga Caverns.
Is there any reason not to? :S
i think some players do, incontrol mentioned and did it on his stream a few days ago i think. i guess cannon rushes aren't that common at that level of play though.
Alot of good players do. But for me i honestly don't think about it until its too late.
On June 28 2011 18:07 nShade wrote: Just a quick question. When you get to play a PvsP on Metalopolis and are scared of cannon rushes, why don't players just put their 1st pylon behind their mineral line, as close as possible to the cliff. That way you can see the proxy pylon as soon as the cannon rusher places it.
I do that every time on Metalopolis and Xel'Naga Caverns.
Is there any reason not to? :S
i think some players do, incontrol mentioned and did it on his stream a few days ago i think. i guess cannon rushes aren't that common at that level of play though.
Alot of good players do. But for me i honestly don't think about it until its too late.
I'd say that it's less common in higher levels of play, but also because strong players often scout their entire base anyway. It seems to me if you get too much into the habit of using that pylon, you might not be looking for other in base cheese. Better to get in the habit of scouting every match rather than relying on building placement.
I'm starting to feel burnt out on starcraft and i'm not sure what I can do to reignite my passion that I once had.I've been trying to switch to other races and I can't handle the learning curve and the losing streak it normally causes. Any mental tricks to try and help get past this? (1.1k masters T) (about a diamond zerg now)
On June 29 2011 07:39 kodas wrote: I'm starting to feel burnt out on starcraft and i'm not sure what I can do to reignite my passion that I once had.I've been trying to switch to other races and I can't handle the learning curve and the losing streak it normally causes. Any mental tricks to try and help get past this? (1.1k masters T) (about a diamond zerg now)
Costum games, team games, random or maybe if you like hardcore practice you could try and find a practice partner to practice 1 build all night long.
On June 29 2011 07:39 kodas wrote: I'm starting to feel burnt out on starcraft and i'm not sure what I can do to reignite my passion that I once had.I've been trying to switch to other races and I can't handle the learning curve and the losing streak it normally causes. Any mental tricks to try and help get past this? (1.1k masters T) (about a diamond zerg now)
lol this sounds like a low testosterone/ED commercial
I would recommend just trying to improve. Think about a strategy you would like to do against X race, and get some good practice partners to practice with. Once you have perfected that strategy move onto another one. I fell this really helps a lot since sometimes laddering can often be:
10 pool baneling bust roach/sling all in (1base) ^ (2base) 4gate double proxy gate 6gate with +1 and blink tank marine all in marine scv allin good macro game repeat above
However, if you feel like just being silly, be silly. Nobody cares how many points or what rank you are in your division except for you. Try to set mini goals or do crazy stuff (inbase hatchery, mass queen, mass nexus (lol)). And try to get away with it for the lolz. But the most important thing is this: Don't play the game just for the sake of playing it. If you're not enjoying it then do something else for a while until you want to play SC again. I don't write advice posts like this too often. Hope it helped!
On June 29 2011 01:12 Razith wrote: So I'm looking into my control group setup and I think it needs to be reworked. Currently I use this:
1 - CC's 2 - Main Army 3 - Rax/Fact/Star 4 - Seconday Army 5 - Special units 6 to 0 - Upgrades / scouts, general purpose
I'm decently quick with these keybindings (around 100apm) but I'm finding my army control is lacking and this is going to be problematic, considering I threw production buildings inbetween my army bindings (2a4a5a?). I was reading old posts about pro/common setups, in which they generally use 1,2,3 army, 4,5,6 production, but after trying 1a2a3a and the other bindings with my production facilities, it didn't seem fluid at all for me.
What I'm considering doing is swapping 2 and 3, making 3 my whole army and bumping up the others 1 binding for the specific units bindings. It'd look like this:
1 - CC's 2 - Productions 3 - Whole army 4 - Main army 5 - Secondary army 6 - Special units 7 to 0 - General purpose
From here, I can tap 1,2,3, to peek through my production then land on my main army so I can keep them mobile, then when the fight comes I can simply shift my hand to 4,5,6 where 4a(t)5a6a feels a lot more natural. Thoughts?
I used to play Terran so I suppose I can say something about this. I personally don't like having all of my production on one hotkey. When I play T my hotkeys went 1- Part of army 2- Part of army 3- Special units 4- CC 5- Barracks 6- Facts 7- Ports 8-0 Unused
I don't feel like you really need to hotkey your amories/engineering bays because you only use them a couple times a game, but I guess it doesn't really hurt. It really just comes down to personal preference. I like just being able to reach straight up the keyboard and access my army, but if 3-6 feels good for you, then by all means go for it.
I was wondering (and had no idea where I should post it) but does APM spamming with a macro on your mouse get you a bannable offense? I saw someone doing it in a game where his apm spiked to 7 thousand and knew it was his mouse, after talking to some friends i realized my mouse could do the same. So i macroed my right click button to right click a ton of times and I went into a custom game vs AI and tested it and got my apm to 40 thousand. I never used it against someone and I dont see how it could help because it actually was hard to control. There is nothing to worry about right? I never have used macros with sc2 other than this and this was rather useless if you ask me i just wanted to try it.
Well, maybe this belongs in the rage thead. maybe it doesn't belong anywhere at all. But seriously, how can bnet 0.2 be that bad? (first time this happened to me, is this a "standard" bnet error?)
Well, maybe this belongs in the rage thead. maybe it doesn't belong anywhere at all. But seriously, how can bnet 0.2 be that bad? (first time this happened to me, is this a "standard" bnet error?)
Seen this happen (fortunately not to me). Extremely unlucky and sad on BNET's part imo. Terrible to see this happen sorry but I think this is a known error hopefully get's fixed soon.
On June 29 2011 23:07 EpicMonkey wrote: What's up with the matchmaking system guys? Even matches are not even. Check out these screens I took after a match.
On June 29 2011 23:07 EpicMonkey wrote: What's up with the matchmaking system guys? Even matches are not even. Check out these screens I took after a match.
On June 29 2011 23:07 EpicMonkey wrote: What's up with the matchmaking system guys? Even matches are not even. Check out these screens I took after a match.
The league is irrelevant. Not to insult but there are minimal differences between bronze, silver, and gold league so it is not uncommon for this to happen. By the looks of it however, you should be moving up soon if you have an even match with someone in top 8 in gold league congrats!
Bottom line: This is not a match making error just that you are progressing on the ladder (your MMR is raising and league is not relevant).
Yes, cybernetics core if possible also worth it. (7)
26%
27 total votes
Your vote: Pylon to block zerg expo worth it?
(Vote): No (Vote): Yes! (Vote): Yes, cybernetics core if possible also worth it.
Curious for this, and I don't think that it warrants its own topic
It really depends on the situation. If the zerg goes 14p/14g speedling expand, then no. If he pulls 2 drones to 15 hatch, then yes. If he then puts down a gas and pool, I usually cancel right after.
Yes, cybernetics core if possible also worth it. (7)
26%
27 total votes
Your vote: Pylon to block zerg expo worth it?
(Vote): No (Vote): Yes! (Vote): Yes, cybernetics core if possible also worth it.
Curious for this, and I don't think that it warrants its own topic
It really depends on the situation. If the zerg goes 14p/14g speedling expand, then no. If he pulls 2 drones to 15 hatch, then yes. If he then puts down a gas and pool, I usually cancel right after.
On June 29 2011 15:22 ATCSurvivor wrote: Why would blizzard ban someone for having 40k apm ? Its a tip or a default in the game.
I think.
It is not a tip or a default in the game. Really "you can use your mouse to make fake apm and get it up to 40k"
I thought maybe becasue i heard that using macros to make 1 button do more than 1 thing was illegal and making the right click button right click 40k times in a minute was certainly more than 1 thing per click.
Something I would like to see on event livestreams, cast games, etc, would be 20-30 second spotlights showcasing the distinctive features, abilities, weaknesses, required tech/buildings, of each unit from all races. I'm not talking stats or numbers, more along the lines of things like ranged, ground only attack, melee, bonus vs light/armored, etc. Whenever it's commercial time, just run a random unit spotlight before or after, it's a SC2 e-sports commercial!
When I've had people watch a game or bo3 set with me, I try to explain things good enough for them to kinda follow the game but a polished brief overview every once in a while would do much better than me talking over the caster. I think it would be encouraging for the un-initiated to know that they can learn as they go with information clearly conveyed in a format they can easily understand.
Ideally It'd be great if Blizzard could produce them for best production quality, but I'm sure there's community members talented enough to do a pro job. I just want it to be something free for anyone-everyone to use. A smooth (pref female) voice, some sort of rotating 3D unit, point form block of text or strait up categories, features (ranged), abilities (bonus vs massive), weaknesses (fragile). Maybe 3-5 seconds fullscreen showing the unit in action at the end.
Anywho, that's just what I was musing the other day, let me know what you think.
On June 30 2011 09:45 Ronthecat wrote: Something I would like to see on event livestreams, cast games, etc, would be 20-30 second spotlights showcasing the distinctive features, abilities, weaknesses, required tech/buildings, of each unit from all races. I'm not talking stats or numbers, more along the lines of things like ranged, ground only attack, melee, bonus vs light/armored, etc. Whenever it's commercial time, just run a random unit spotlight before or after, it's a SC2 e-sports commercial!
When I've had people watch a game or bo3 set with me, I try to explain things good enough for them to kinda follow the game but a polished brief overview every once in a while would do much better than me talking over the caster. I think it would be encouraging for the un-initiated to know that they can learn as they go with information clearly conveyed in a format they can easily understand.
Ideally It'd be great if Blizzard could produce them for best production quality, but I'm sure there's community members talented enough to do a pro job. I just want it to be something free for anyone-everyone to use. A smooth (pref female) voice, some sort of rotating 3D unit, point form block of text or strait up categories, features (ranged), abilities (bonus vs massive), weaknesses (fragile). Maybe 3-5 seconds fullscreen showing the unit in action at the end.
Anywho, that's just what I was musing the other day, let me know what you think.
Current streams are aimed at decent players, they would not need it, see it as an explanation of soccer during the world championships, it would just look silly, well that's how I'd feel about it.
Hi, so I wanted to know the hotkey to follow units when obsing or watching replays. I know you can click on the portrait but I often see the cursor elsewhere during tournaments while a unit is being followed by the camera.
On June 30 2011 06:07 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: Really tired of massive delay on Bnet.
Really disappointing, seriously recently there's usually 1 day each week where the delay is 0.5 seconds or more.
Just plain ridiculous.
Lol what region do you play on, what region do you live in and what internet do you have? 0.5 would be ridiculously high, no way.
I play in NA server, and I have 8 mb/s.
Usually, the "not laggy" days have 0.4 second delay, people are just used to it because they never had a LAN version to play.
But sometimes like today it's even higher.
One point in the day, I had about 0.8-1.0 second delay, where I couldn't stutter step micro at all and basically my multitasking was halved because I had to make sure my commands actually went through...
If you don't believe the delay is that bad, check out the difference:
In terms of MMR and/or oppoentns faced (AMM) - if you lose 100 games in a row (just an example really >.>), do you need to win 100 games to get back to where you were in terms of MMR and/or opponents faced or can you win say 10 games in a row (for example) then it starts matching you up with harder players automatically despite the fact that you lost 100 games in a row previously?
This Friday, July 1st at 8:00pm Pacific Standard Time, StimulusGaming will be hosting its first ever in-house tournament. The tournament will be live-cast during the Semi-Finals and Finals. StimulusGaming is a new clan dedicated to the Starcraft 2 community and its members. Our goal at StimulusGaming is to reach out to the Starcraft Community and help our members become better Starcraft players while having fun. For more information on the tournament or the community, check out the links below. Thank you.
Hi, i want to write to "All" in a sc2 game with the key "enter" and i also want to send it to "All" with the same key. How do i manage that in the hotkeys options? If i use "enter" once, i can't use it again...
This Friday, July 1st at 8:00pm Pacific Standard Time, StimulusGaming will be hosting its first ever in-house tournament. The tournament will be live-cast during the Semi-Finals and Finals. StimulusGaming is a new clan dedicated to the Starcraft 2 community and its members. Our goal at StimulusGaming is to reach out to the Starcraft Community and help our members become better Starcraft players while having fun. For more information on the tournament or the community, check out the links below. Thank you.
Yes, cybernetics core if possible also worth it. (7)
26%
27 total votes
Your vote: Pylon to block zerg expo worth it?
(Vote): No (Vote): Yes! (Vote): Yes, cybernetics core if possible also worth it.
Curious for this, and I don't think that it warrants its own topic
Really depends. As a Zerg, I voted no. I go 15 Pool / 15 Hatch MorroW-Style and I have a perfectly worked out back up plan in case this happens. I really don't feel it puts me significantly behind, but that's just the opinion of another platinum Zerg.
Also, because no one replied: I've been experimenting with MorroW's ZvP which is basically an adjusted Spanishiwa build transitioning into Ling/BLing/Infestor with +2/+2 baneling drops and a lot of drop / counter attack antics in general.
While I like the build itself a lot, I am not too confident with the Infestor transition. You have to multitask a lot to make this build effective and not having your macro totally collapse is hard enough. Handling the infestors just seems to be a little bit too much for me. I've been trying to get Mutalisks (and eventually BLords and Cracklings) instead of Infestors to enhance the distractive side of this build in order to get more baneling drops going.
While I have had huge success with it, I am not too sure wether it's just my opponents being goldish level suckers as I myself or if it is a good idea to transition into Muta in general. Sometimes, my opponent just decides to do a desperation attack with all the stuff he has left and I find myself struggling against that if I spend most of my gas on Mutas instead of banelings, just because they lack the raw fighting ability of infestors. (Sounds contraintuitive, but is actually pretty accurate, from what I feel.)
Have you seen anyone... well, legit do this? I know MutaLing is a common style, especially Moon and July use them with great success, but I just love my little baneling shenanigans. So to sum the question up: is it viable? I would hate to learn to play that style successfully and find out that in retrospect I should just have sticked with something that actually works once I get promoted.
BTW: sorry if that's the wrong place to ask, I just felt that the strategy forum was the wrong place. A replay of one of my games is not gonna get me this question answered properly.
On June 17 2011 03:24 Scipaeus121212 wrote: I wonder what people/tournaments think about programs that basically switch keys around (for example when you click shift it counts as alt and vice versa) and mouse keys? I plan on playing about as seriously as it gets, so I want to make sure I use the best hotkey setup I can when I start.
I'd think that it's fine, despite the fact that this might give an advantage possibly not avaliable to some (particularly the mouse keys), so do many other factors like different gear, bigger monitor or faster computer, but I just want to make sure I don't get used to something not allowed.
Sorry for quoting myself, but Im really interested in the answer and this question is burried too deep to be found out now. ^^
On July 01 2011 05:55 XXhkXX wrote: Does anyone know a solution to getting out of being ladder locked other than waiting for a new season?
To what extent is it locked? I've been promoted just yesterday.
Well I mean that I'm stuck in first place gold, but still vsing plat players. I guess its not as severely blocked as when i was in bronze last season vsing gold players >>
Is scouting with barracks viable against Zerg? Barracks (150 minerals+lost mining time for SCV), while a mule instead of a scan generates roughly 270 minerals.
On June 30 2011 10:10 Baseic wrote: Current streams are aimed at decent players, they would not need it, see it as an explanation of soccer during the world championships, it would just look silly, well that's how I'd feel about it.
Ok, *shrug*. I would hope they wouldn't look silly / stupid if they were well done, even to decent players. A player streaming his ladder matches wouldn't need/want anything like this. I'm talking more for tournaments, big and small that are streamed. So many people are trying to grow e-sports and get more attention for Starcraft 2. I'd like to promote it on the viewing side of things, the people that show some interest but simply are not gamers, which is most of my friends. You don't have to play soccer to enjoy watching it. But like I said, it's hard for me to ad-lib explain things / convey general information about the game's format, units, etc, while the games are going on and the screen is moving all over the place and there's so much to cover. Visual aid plus brief description every once in a while = better imo. I've noticed a few casters have been actively trying to keep the un-initiated in the loop by occasionally explaining certain tactics, terminology or abilities in a manner that non-players / complete noobs can understand. I don't want it for the players, the die-hards, I want it for everyone else who might turn into the occasional stream viewer, a NASL/Gomtv subscriber, and grow the audience for e-sports and SC2 in particular. If SC2 had the popularity of soccer/hockey/etc then it might look frivolous/silly as you suggest, it's still easier for a non-sports fan to more or less follow a soccer or hockey match than it is a game of SC2, there are so many units, abilities, tactics, etc, beyond "ball goes in the net = goal" and "most goals when the timer runs out = wins". I wouldn't suggest anything like this for a FPS as it's easy enough to follow, see guy, shoot guy, change to one of a few weapons and explain the few weapon choices. I think it was at a MLG or ICCup? where they had some quick spots on the maps to be played, outlining the choke points and back door rocks, etc. Doesn't mean much to me, didn't look silly either, but at an event like that it helps the non-SC2 players, the non-gamers that are watching. Admittedly they weren't super well done but still good enough to give the viewer a good idea of what tactics are favored on a particular map and why. Generic tid-bits of information that can be used for filler couldn't hurt?
only one comment. InControL you've been pushing hard to grow e-sports, if you read this what's your take? ^.^
Yeah it's pretty fucking annoying to get scouted by a rax. Two queens take half a week to kill it. So yeah, a rax scout is pretty viable. Just build the rax close to the zerg base so the travel time is short.
Ronthecat.. I don't know about your time zone but for me to wake up at 5:10am (EST) to watch the GSL live I'd say I'm pretty try/die hard :D
hey guys I'm looking to play some SC2 again but all my RL friends have quit. Can anyone recommend some good channels to hangout, meet people and get some games going?
On June 30 2011 10:10 Baseic wrote: Current streams are aimed at decent players, they would not need it, see it as an explanation of soccer during the world championships, it would just look silly, well that's how I'd feel about it.
Ok, *shrug*. I would hope they wouldn't look silly / stupid if they were well done, even to decent players. A player streaming his ladder matches wouldn't need/want anything like this. I'm talking more for tournaments, big and small that are streamed. So many people are trying to grow e-sports and get more attention for Starcraft 2. I'd like to promote it on the viewing side of things, the people that show some interest but simply are not gamers, which is most of my friends. You don't have to play soccer to enjoy watching it. But like I said, it's hard for me to ad-lib explain things / convey general information about the game's format, units, etc, while the games are going on and the screen is moving all over the place and there's so much to cover. Visual aid plus brief description every once in a while = better imo. I've noticed a few casters have been actively trying to keep the un-initiated in the loop by occasionally explaining certain tactics, terminology or abilities in a manner that non-players / complete noobs can understand. I don't want it for the players, the die-hards, I want it for everyone else who might turn into the occasional stream viewer, a NASL/Gomtv subscriber, and grow the audience for e-sports and SC2 in particular. If SC2 had the popularity of soccer/hockey/etc then it might look frivolous/silly as you suggest, it's still easier for a non-sports fan to more or less follow a soccer or hockey match than it is a game of SC2, there are so many units, abilities, tactics, etc, beyond "ball goes in the net = goal" and "most goals when the timer runs out = wins". I wouldn't suggest anything like this for a FPS as it's easy enough to follow, see guy, shoot guy, change to one of a few weapons and explain the few weapon choices. I think it was at a MLG or ICCup? where they had some quick spots on the maps to be played, outlining the choke points and back door rocks, etc. Doesn't mean much to me, didn't look silly either, but at an event like that it helps the non-SC2 players, the non-gamers that are watching. Admittedly they weren't super well done but still good enough to give the viewer a good idea of what tactics are favored on a particular map and why. Generic tid-bits of information that can be used for filler couldn't hurt?
only one comment. InControL you've been pushing hard to grow e-sports, if you read this what's your take? ^.^
Well you do have a point there, but it has to be executed perfectly to not look silly, I already know how the reactions would be when they mess it up.
On July 01 2011 10:45 vnlegend wrote: hey guys I'm looking to play some SC2 again but all my RL friends have quit. Can anyone recommend some good channels to hangout, meet people and get some games going?
Probe1 haha yeah I think getting non-gamers to the point of watching the gsl live would make them hard-core, but it would be great to be able to get people into viewing SC2 competitive play to the point that they might pick up a gomtv pass to watch some of the vods from the top matchs/finals!
Baseic Very true, my initial thought would be for Blizzard to produce them and I was going to suggest it could be available from the Media section on the official SC2 website. But I just went there and I decided to watch the the "overview" videos of the races. They're not super long but seem to do a good job of conveying a lot of general information without going into any details. But they do mention main details of each unit, hydras shoot spines, roaches are armored, while showing gameplay of them in action. Next time an opportunity arises I'll play one of them for a friend and get their take on it. It's not exactly what I was looking for, they talk about Kerrigan, etc, but close enough. Can't believe I hadn't watched those overview videos before!
On July 01 2011 10:45 vnlegend wrote: hey guys I'm looking to play some SC2 again but all my RL friends have quit. Can anyone recommend some good channels to hangout, meet people and get some games going?
You should do a search on team liquid, I know this has been asked a few times and there's some greatest hits youtube videos out there. That's a pretty good hook. Explain to them what's what then try to impress upon them the difficulty of the game.. then show them how a pro orchestrates it all
On July 02 2011 02:56 Shiv. wrote: Where's the July thread?
look at the name of the OP, then look at the date of the op, then look at the dates of ops of past months. What I am saying is, it is not supposed to be in time.
Under the old system of up and down matches, you could actually go from Code A to Code S with a losing record (not including the qualification matches). Code A: RO32 2-1 RO16 2-1 RO8 0-2
UpandDown: Match 1: 0-2 Match 2: 2-1
for a total 6-7. In fact July almost did exactly this in his run to Code S, except he won his last match 2-0 to give him a 6-6 record. With the new groups-of-five system, this will no longer be possible, as you will have to at least 3-2 to make the top2 in your group. Whether or top you can advance with an even record will depend on how tiebreakers will work, and whether it will be a true round-robin group format.
On July 02 2011 03:50 pullarius1 wrote: Under the old system of up and down matches, you could actually go from Code A to Code S with a losing record (not including the qualification matches). Code A: RO32 2-1 RO16 2-1 RO8 0-2
UpandDown: Match 1: 0-2 Match 2: 2-1
for a total 6-7. In fact July almost did exactly this in his run to Code S, except he won his last match 2-0 to give him a 6-6 record. With the new groups-of-five system, this will no longer be possible, as you will have to at least 3-2 to make the top2 in your group. Whether or top you can advance with an even record will depend on how tiebreakers will work, and whether it will be a true round-robin group format.
On July 01 2011 05:55 XXhkXX wrote: Does anyone know a solution to getting out of being ladder locked other than waiting for a new season?
To what extent is it locked? I've been promoted just yesterday.
Well I mean that I'm stuck in first place gold, but still vsing plat players. I guess its not as severely blocked as when i was in bronze last season vsing gold players >>
lol i finally got promoted, ironically i was in second place in my league, but i still ranked up XD
On July 01 2011 05:55 XXhkXX wrote: Does anyone know a solution to getting out of being ladder locked other than waiting for a new season?
To what extent is it locked? I've been promoted just yesterday.
Well I mean that I'm stuck in first place gold, but still vsing plat players. I guess its not as severely blocked as when i was in bronze last season vsing gold players >>
lol i finally got promoted, ironically i was in second place in my league, but i still ranked up XD
I don't think that the placement within your league is as important as you might think. Once your MMR rises high enough so it puts you up against players above your league, you are close to promotion. If you beat them more than 50% of the time, you get promoted (that's obviously oversimplified, but it gives a general idea of how that system works.)
Let's say we have John. John is a decent player, nothing special. He wins about 50% of the time, maybe a bit less. He keeps losing to players above his league, he demolishes most people within his league though. Within his own division, he steadily gets placed around 5th place.
Let's just assume the 4 players placed above him all simultaneously go on a losing streak. John, meanwhile, keeps his win rate constant. That would soonly make him the number 1 ranked player in his division (as his rating wouldn't change much, while his fellow players would drop a lot of points due to their losing streak), without actually having progressed towards his promotion.
I hope this example explains why your ranking within your own division is irrelevant, as it's dependant on the other people in it, while your promotion is only dependant on your own win rate.
If you already knew that or I got something wrong, I'm very willing to edit/delete my post.
On July 01 2011 05:55 XXhkXX wrote: Does anyone know a solution to getting out of being ladder locked other than waiting for a new season?
To what extent is it locked? I've been promoted just yesterday.
Well I mean that I'm stuck in first place gold, but still vsing plat players. I guess its not as severely blocked as when i was in bronze last season vsing gold players >>
lol i finally got promoted, ironically i was in second place in my league, but i still ranked up XD
I don't think that the placement within your league is as important as you might think. Once your MMR rises high enough so it puts you up against players above your league, you are close to promotion. If you beat them more than 50% of the time, you get promoted (that's obviously oversimplified, but it gives a general idea of how that system works.)
Let's say we have John. John is a decent player, nothing special. He wins about 50% of the time, maybe a bit less. He keeps losing to players above his league, he demolishes most people within his league though. Within his own division, he steadily gets placed around 5th place.
Let's just assume the 4 players placed above him all simultaneously go on a losing streak. John, meanwhile, keeps his win rate constant. That would soonly make him the number 1 ranked player in his division (as his rating wouldn't change much, while his fellow players would drop a lot of points due to their losing streak), without actually having progressed towards his promotion.
I hope this example explains why your ranking within your own division is irrelevant, as it's dependant on the other people in it, while your promotion is only dependant on your own win rate.
If you already knew that or I got something wrong, I'm very willing to edit/delete my post.
On July 03 2011 08:37 [F_]aths wrote: Koreans sometimes type ww instead of gg. Is that the same key position or an actual korean expression?
Can someone post the Hangul signs for the real korean gg?
The symbol ᄌ is J in Korean, so GG can be ᄌᄌ, ᄌ on the korean keyboard is the same place as the english W, so WW instead of ᄌᄌ(JJ, thats why you hear "JAY JAY" instead of "GEE GEE"
The actual character for where G is on english is ᄒᄒ so you might sometimes see that. But ᄒ has the sound H so that wouldn't make much sense :p
In conclusion
ᄌ is a J sound = ᄌᄌ = JJ so GG WW = position for ᄌ on korean, so if you have english on its WW GG = You know what that means :p ᄒᄒ = Where G is on korean setting so ᄒᄒ = someone trying to type GG but with korean on instead of english
I have a sound question. You know the windows sound whenever you make a command such as building a unit or using a hotkey etc? My game does not make that sound and I cannot find it anywhere in the sound options and I have messed around with some things. I have windows 7 64 bit and I turned the system sounds up to match my speaker volume but to no avail. Am I missing something? Any advice is appreciated.
So a friend and mine were just messing around in 2v2s we werent being rude or harrasing or anything and we decided it would be funny if we said every single thing we made. So when we made a probe we said "probe" in all chat and when we made a pylon we said "pylon" ect. We then proceeded to win and the guy said he reported us. Should we be worried? We won but we just said everything we made.
In PvT, is MM/MMM way better than Gateway units? This is a serious question, as it seems to me that Protoss always has to tech up to deal with it. I personally have a grudge against this unit composition.
On July 04 2011 17:17 edc wrote: In PvT, is MM/MMM way better than Gateway units? This is a serious question, as it seems to me that Protoss always has to tech up to deal with it. I personally have a grudge against this unit composition.
Not necessarily. A lot of Terrans live in fear of gateway units with enough sentries. Basically, until army supplies get beyond 40, forcefields can easily de-fang any Terran bio push, and possibly clean up most of it with minimal losses. After that point, however, things get dicey on both ends. Protoss, with proper macro, will always be 1 warpgate production cycle ahead of Terran because of the warp-in to cooldown, but pound for pound, Terran units beat Protoss without FFs. As the mid game approaches, these aspects can balloon to give each race the advantage. For example, 6 gate pushes can be especially devastating coupled with a FE Protoss, because it capitalizes on this warpgate mechanic (frontloaded production cycles). Meanwhile, the more common example is the early-mid game MM(M) composition coupled with high aggression (to force more gateway vs rax battles).
EPT
.God that would of been so awesome.
![[image loading]](http://img833.imageshack.us/img833/6022/stuffz.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://data.fuskbugg.se/skalman02/4dfa7416a229e_Untitled.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/YTEJd.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090221153421/starcraft/images/thumb/d/de/TerranDominion_Logo2.jpg/277px-TerranDominion_Logo2.jpg){kind=logo}
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/tNKlu.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/TFPW4.jpg)
