|
On September 29 2011 12:36 Apnea wrote:
I don't see how wanting viable scouting with being forced down a tech path just to scout that I'm behind means I don't understand the game.
And what early pressure? If you're honestly that scared of a stalker poke then make a bunker - it will only confuse the Protoss that much more and you can always salvage it (lol), although with a depot/rax/depot wall you're pretty much safe regardless. Or if you're referring to being all-in'd, that's your fault for not scouting it.
You see, there exists this period for Protoss where they're almost completely blind. Terran has a wall and can choose what the Toss sees, and knowing that a T has a single gas is almost meaningnless because Terrans have countless gas-light openers (ranging all the way from 1-rax marauder expo to 1-1-1 allins) so it's not like that initial intel is really going far. Sure you can get a general idea with some pokes, but the point is it's absurdly difficult to know what a T is doing and are therefore forced to guess.
It's during this time that a Z would normally sack an overlord or a T would drop a scan, what do you propose Protoss does, flips a coin? Sure, if that's what you call "understanding" the game.
totally owesomely insanely true...it is exactly the problem of the terran 1-1-1 in pvt! If you scout it with lets say an observer, it will come too late to save you from a certain death.
If you scout with stalkers.....well they choose what they show you...
You believe its a 1-1-1 and prepare for it and it is in fact not a 1-1-1 but a 2rax, your screwed. A fast expo, maybe you got a slight chance depending on the greediness of terran to cut in bunkers.
etcetera!
|
On September 29 2011 12:36 Apnea wrote:
I don't see how wanting viable scouting that doesn't require me to invest heavily in a tech path means I don't understand the game.
And what early pressure? If you're honestly that scared of a stalker poke then make a bunker - it will only confuse the Protoss that much more and you can always salvage it (lol), although with a depot/rax/depot wall you're pretty much safe regardless. Or if you're referring to being all-in'd, that's your fault for not scouting it.
You see, there exists this period for Protoss where they're almost completely blind. Terran has a wall and can choose what the Toss sees, and knowing that a T has a single gas is almost meaningnless because Terrans have countless gas-light openers (ranging all the way from 1-rax marauder expo to 1-1-1 allins) so it's not like that initial intel is really going far. Sure you can get a general idea with some pokes, but the point is it's absurdly difficult to know what a T is doing and are therefore forced to guess.
It's during this time that a Z would normally sack an overlord or a T would drop a scan, what do you propose Protoss does, flips a coin? Sure, if that's what you call "understanding" the game.
If a terran makes a bunker, you need to go obs. Robo is the correct answer however to terran tech, counters both 111, thor rush and cloakshee.
I play protoss man. Yes a toss is blind but as I said, that same blindness exists in PvZ after lings intiailly come out. It's not a big deal. L2P
You act like an obs is the only viable scout, no, scouting the front is much more important than having an obs in their main.
|
I don't get what you mean Learn to Play. My point is I'm TRYING to play to the best of my ability, with proper intel. How am I supposed to properly respond when it's highly unlikely that I can gather enough information to be 90%+ certain what I'm going up against?
What if a Terran goes 1-gas but still gets a super fast expansion and a bunker? Sure I've scouted it with my robo, but now he has an expansion well before me simply because I was forced to tech in order to scout. It's not that I'm vulnerable, it's that I'm behind for the sole reason that I had no other safe option.
I do my absolute best to constantly poke the front with my probe and stalker, but the fact remains I can never know what's behind those walls without an obs or hallucination - and that's the problem I have.
|
On September 29 2011 12:51 PeggyHill wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2011 12:36 Apnea wrote:
I don't see how wanting viable scouting that doesn't require me to invest heavily in a tech path means I don't understand the game.
And what early pressure? If you're honestly that scared of a stalker poke then make a bunker - it will only confuse the Protoss that much more and you can always salvage it (lol), although with a depot/rax/depot wall you're pretty much safe regardless. Or if you're referring to being all-in'd, that's your fault for not scouting it.
You see, there exists this period for Protoss where they're almost completely blind. Terran has a wall and can choose what the Toss sees, and knowing that a T has a single gas is almost meaningnless because Terrans have countless gas-light openers (ranging all the way from 1-rax marauder expo to 1-1-1 allins) so it's not like that initial intel is really going far. Sure you can get a general idea with some pokes, but the point is it's absurdly difficult to know what a T is doing and are therefore forced to guess.
It's during this time that a Z would normally sack an overlord or a T would drop a scan, what do you propose Protoss does, flips a coin? Sure, if that's what you call "understanding" the game. If a terran makes a bunker, you need to go obs. Robo is the correct answer however to terran tech, counters both 111, thor rush and cloakshee. I play protoss man. Yes a toss is blind but as I said, that same blindness exists in PvZ after lings intiailly come out. It's not a big deal. L2P You act like an obs is the only viable scout, no, scouting the front is much more important than having an obs in their main.
"Robo is the correct answer however to terran tech, counters both 111, thor and cloakshee"
Wow all the best protoss players in the world can't figure out a proper counter to a 111, but you can. Just make robo it counters the 111. Thanks for your insight. O btw, if you make a robo then an obs and then wait for it to cross the map and realize its a 3 rax or a 2 rax expand, or even something weird like a 2 rax with a ghost for emp, then what do you do? You've already invested in gates, a sentry so you can control your ramp, a robo and obs? Also, is the amount of time between ling scout and overlord scout really that similar to the time between probe scout and obs?
I'm trying to L2p as you put it so help me out. What are the proper responses to scouting these things? Against which of these should I expand myself and play from behind, and vs which of these should I try to all in?
|
On September 29 2011 12:22 PeggyHill wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2011 11:58 Apnea wrote:On September 29 2011 10:55 PeggyHill wrote:
Faking a build is inefficient, in a way you are ahead if a player fakes his build.
Zealot+stalker scouting in PvT is about seeing wether he has marauder or not, bunker or not.
Marauder = 3 gate expo
Bunker = robo/stargate tech, or gateway tech if you have seen a tech lab on a rax
'Scouting' is not about have a 100% perfect view of your opponents build. It's about reading the small things.
Just hide your marauders, show them a reactored rax and only marines with a wall and there's absolutely nothing the Protoss can do about it. I've offraced plenty of times, and every time I get a TvP I just do exactly what I stated above, and 9 times out of 10 it elicits a robo/1-base oriented response from the Protoss. Many will think it's a 1-1-1 and therefore go 1-base colossi, in which case something like a 2-rax expo into reactored vikings wins handily or even a 3-rax can outright kill them because they have only zealots in an effort to get fast colossi. Hide marauder you will struggle harder to hold initial pressure, or will at least take damage. Reactored rax being shown would require reactor first, or a tech lab on a 2nd hidden rax, which would delay concussive/shields/stim etc. That already is inefficieny. The exact same sort of 'scouting imbalance' exists in PvZ as well. After your initial probe dies, you can't really scout a zerg until obs/hall. The only scouting you can do is of the front (how many spines, roaches or not etc.) and of a third base. It's fine, its part of the matchup. You aren't susposed to have perfect knowledge ever, that would be too easy. I actually cannot believe people are talking about this tbh. It shows such a lack of knowledge about starcraft it is unbelieveable.
PvZ is way different than PvT.
Safe builds against most of the things that Zerg can throw at you early game (before scouting options come into play) exist that do not put you too behind in economy and tech (3gate expand, FFE stargate, etc...), although korean zergs seem to be able to exploit any safe timing window P's builds give them to ultra-drone.
In PvT however, on some maps you won't even have time to enter the Terran base because it will be already walled-off, and even you do see the gas (or gasless), it doesn't tell you a lot. So now that's fine, maybe P has a safe build against terran that does not rely on complete information and doesn't put you too far behind. Except we don't. As said above, Terran can disguise what he's doing if he so desires (poking and seeing some marines in a bunker could mean an expand or a tech build, right?). "Go robo then, noob", you will tell me. But when your observer reaches the main it's often too late. You scout a 111, well you're kinda dead unless some miracle happens, you're on 1 base with a robo and some gates, with a late expand, which you don't know if you must cancel or not. 1 base Protoss cannot compete with 1 base Terran (I don't know if there are people that still deny it, but regardless of any other T "flexible" mechanics, MULEs alone give an important mineral saturation advantage to Terran : More eco = more supply, end of the story). Let's say you scout a fast expand with the observer, you're also behind (although it's still possible to win but it's kinda unfair, you have to outplay him from there).
Let's say you opt for an eco build now. Nexus first and 1 gate FE are both considered risky nowadays (many people called MC greedy when he 1 gate fast expanded) and weak against early rax timings, which can be disguised by Terran (hide your marauders for example).
I'm well aware that Terran does not always know either what's happening in the protoss base (because you can always proxy some tech and whatnot to dodge scans), but the truth is, nothing Protoss can throw at you is dangerous... and that since several protoss nerfs for PvP I believe. 1 rax FE is considered safe, but tech builds are also safe, everything feels safe with terran. That's the difference.
You're right in saying that perfect knowledge should not be required in Starcraft, and that it's all about reading the small things and such, but for now, it's just easier to say that as a terran than as the other 2 races. Terran basically has to get information about protoss when protoss has expanded, because 1 base protoss is nothing scary at all, whereas Protoss is scared shitless of a 1base terran that hides Justin Browder knows what, from 2nd orbital command to nearly unstoppable all ins.
Simple but boring fix: disallow command centers and orbital commands to lift off. That way we can confirm either an all in or an expand build. Obviously this won't be done, because "Broodwar blablablah" and "Terran's lore related colonialist bullshit or whatever". But it's quite clear in the actual state of the game that Terran is the safest race to expand with. That would be fine for everybody, but Terran is coincidentally enough the best race to all in and cheese with TOO. Can anybody argue with those two statements? I'm sure we can find multiple GSL stats and VODs to back it up.
I must also precise that this design issue doesn't affect me in particular (somebody might throw a "l2p noob, balance is fine at your bronzish level", you're never too safe). I have no particular trouble finding something to improve on when I play against terran. It's just sympathy towards Protoss pro-players (especially koreans) and desire to have some variety in SC2's competitions that motivate those kind of posts for most Protoss fans.
|
On September 29 2011 13:21 ZenithM wrote:
I must also precise that this design issue doesn't affect me in particular (somebody might throw a "l2p noob, balance is fine at your bronzish level", you're never too safe). I have no particular trouble finding something to improve on when I play against terran. It's just sympathy towards Protoss pro-players (especially koreans) and desire to have some variety in SC2's competitions that motivate those kind of posts for most Protoss fans.
I'm going to build on this. A serious problem for me at least is that I don't have any pros to look up to any more. With the possible exception of HuK, there are no players I can watch and try to learn from. Zerg players have Nestea and DRG, Terrans have untold numbers of pros, but when I watch the top Protoss players, all I can see is them playing extremely well and then just losing. Motivation to keep improving is hard to find when I know there's nothing there for me in the end. Doesn't make a difference how good I get. Unless I switch to Terran or Zerg, I'm never going to amount to anything. That's so depressing.
I'll also say that inability to scout is an issue at all levels of play. I often just get lucky and guess right. Not any kind of skill there. Against Zerg, at my level, when I lose it feels like it's because I didn't make proper use of my scouting options or pressure when I could have applied it. It feels like I messed up, and deserved that loss. Against Terran, it only sometimes feels like I deserve losses. Other times, it feels like I got the short end of the scouting stick and prepared the wrong defense. That's not a good feeling.
If it matters to anyone, my level of play is low NA Masters (so around low Korean Diamond).
|
On September 29 2011 12:54 Apnea wrote:
I don't get what you mean Learn to Play. My point is I'm TRYING to play to the best of my ability, with proper intel. How am I supposed to properly respond when it's highly unlikely that I can gather enough information to be 90%+ certain what I'm going up against?
What if a Terran goes 1-gas but still gets a super fast expansion and a bunker? Sure I've scouted it with my robo, but now he has an expansion well before me simply because I was forced to tech in order to scout. It's not that I'm vulnerable, it's that I'm behind for the sole reason that I had no other safe option.
I do my absolute best to constantly poke the front with my probe and stalker, but the fact remains I can never know what's behind those walls without an obs or hallucination - and that's the problem I have.
Maybe one idea might be to prepare for the tough eventuality? Even Protoss have defensive structures (cannons) which can help at the right spot. Your units might not be able to respond fast enough, so build a cannon or two at the critical spot to make elevatoring units dangerous (and to buy you time to actually respond). Terrans HAVE TO build bunkers in preparation of some expected attacks and Zerg build Spine Crawlers. Sadly there is still the "Day[9] mantra" of defensive structures which someone "doesnt want to build"; IMO the alternative is "build those structures or die". The problem of Protoss is that they cant reproduce fast due to the limited number of gates, but you can build as many cannons as you choose - as long as you have the resources - and these cannons have a bigger range than any early unit so they should definetely be a viable choice.
The mantra is based on BW thinking and probably true there, but due to the easier ways to mass units in SC2 building defensive structures in large enough numbers is the ONLY option to respond to a sudden swarm of units outside your door.
|
4713 Posts
Building defensive structures is in general a bad idea, and everyone at the highest level of play knows it, they only make them in certain specific situations.
To the point, terrans can afford to build bunkers because, they can salvage them at a later time to regain 75% of those resources, bunkers also help protect their vulnerable marines. Also terrans have an abundance of minerals due to mules, but at the highest level of play you still see them keep close to 0 resources even with mules.
However as protoss and as zerg, every defensive structure build is one less something.
As protoss, every cannon is one less gateway, 1 and a half zealot and 1 and a quarter stalker.
You do see players like HuK make a forge fast expand and protect it with 2 cannons, but you must realize that, doing so greatly limits their offensive power, and its more of a deterrent then real protection, only time I've seen pros put down more cannons is when they know a big roach army is incoming and they don't have any units to defend with.
For zerg, every spine crawler and every spore crawler is one less drone, and that is a big deal.
Basically a spine crawler costs 100 minerals, the drone that went into making that spine crawler cost 50 minerals, on top of that the zerg needs to use 1 larva and 50 more minerals to re-make that drone that he sacrificed to build the spine crawler. So the effective cost of building a spine crawler is 200 minerals, and factor in that 1 larva that could have been used to make another unit, or those minerals that could have been used to make 8 lings, 2 roaches, etc.
Again, I only see good zergs put down 1 or 2 spines as a deterrent not as actual protection, and they only invest in spore crawlers in case they know banshee, phoenix/void ray or DT harass is on its way and they only do it on specific timings when they know those threats emerge. For example protoss vs zerg, if the zerg keeps poking and sees the protoss only have 3 sentries for a long time and a couple of zealots, he will know something fishy is up and will react by making spore crawlers and detection, because he knows for sure that gas is going into something either DT or air, spore crawlers countering both.
Even terrans against mass muta harass only make 2 or 3 auto-turrets at specific points like at mineral lines or near production facilities, the backbone of terran defense against mutas is still marines, protection against mutas picking of reinforcements is to send them in a clump, protection against mutas is also better marine control and keeping the muta numbers low.
Actually the best protection against mutas is to keep pressuring the zerg so the mutas can never have the time to raid the mineral lines since investing in protecting the mineral lines just eats away resources.
The only time it might be safe to make defensive buildings is really late game when you are maxed 200/200 and you have already researched everything, and even then it might be better to just make more production facilities.
|
On September 29 2011 18:50 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2011 12:54 Apnea wrote:
I don't get what you mean Learn to Play. My point is I'm TRYING to play to the best of my ability, with proper intel. How am I supposed to properly respond when it's highly unlikely that I can gather enough information to be 90%+ certain what I'm going up against?
What if a Terran goes 1-gas but still gets a super fast expansion and a bunker? Sure I've scouted it with my robo, but now he has an expansion well before me simply because I was forced to tech in order to scout. It's not that I'm vulnerable, it's that I'm behind for the sole reason that I had no other safe option.
I do my absolute best to constantly poke the front with my probe and stalker, but the fact remains I can never know what's behind those walls without an obs or hallucination - and that's the problem I have. Maybe one idea might be to prepare for the tough eventuality? Even Protoss have defensive structures (cannons) which can help at the right spot. Your units might not be able to respond fast enough, so build a cannon or two at the critical spot to make elevatoring units dangerous (and to buy you time to actually respond). Terrans HAVE TO build bunkers in preparation of some expected attacks and Zerg build Spine Crawlers. Sadly there is still the "Day[9] mantra" of defensive structures which someone "doesnt want to build"; IMO the alternative is "build those structures or die". The problem of Protoss is that they cant reproduce fast due to the limited number of gates, but you can build as many cannons as you choose - as long as you have the resources - and these cannons have a bigger range than any early unit so they should definetely be a viable choice.
I would agree if it were not for salvage and unburrow/burrow (salvage being, as always, the better of the two, as the terran mechanics). A cannon in front of your natural is essentially 150 minerals lost that could have been a gateway. It won't even defend drops in the midgame. Because of the pylon nerf, you WILL have to build 2 pylons around your natural's nexus if you also want to defend against banshees early on.
It sounds a bit ridiculous, obviously you can build 2 pylons, not like you don't need pylons, but in fact, before a 111 timing for example, you don't need that many pylons because you have not that much supply yet. A 111 typically comes at what, 60 to 80 supply, and you must be ready for banshees much earlier than that. That's like 5-6 pylons + 2 nexuses. So let's say you have those 2 pylons to defend your natural with some cannons, that's only 3 remaining pylons in your main or on the map. Now you will want some space to build your infrastructure, especially since the pylon nerf, so you'll want to spread a bit at least 2 sets of those last pylons, and maybe one pylon for vision on the border of your base and to be able to warp on the low ground (useful to defend 111) Guess what? Artosis pylons right there... And it's not some theorycraftish argument either, that's really how we protoss feel when placing pylons since the patch, it's not like Protoss players are dumb and build intentionnaly Artosis pylons, it's just that it happens more frequently because we basically have no space off of just one pylon. I would assume that everybody agrees that building more pylons that you need is considered bad macro and silly play, and probably not intended by Blizzard as the design of Protoss.
Ok now that this is out of the way, let's look at the power of cannons themselves when they come into play, in battle.
1 cannon is beaten by 2 stim marauders, by 4 stim marines, by 3 reapers, and outranged by siege tanks. Now, usually, the cool thing about static defenses is that they are way more cost effective than units in combat, at least for basic ones. A 150 minerals cannon loses to 200 minerals of marines. Really? Do you know how much more shit than your opponent you must have in units to hope to break a bunker with Protoss?
So no, you never want to build cannons to defend yourself against terran units, that's just ridiculous. Otherwise we would just forge fast expand against terran too, which is ridiculous, even without accounting for reapers. The only thing cannons are good at early game is defending marine+scv all ins, and it's always a tough call anyway (no repair, haha).
Compare all I just said with how Terran works in that regard. You don't have to worry about building placement most of the time (hell you can even lift off buildings if you misplaced them), you can build depots wherever you want, preferably in useful locations and 1 to 3 bunkers is generally enough to be safe against any all in (1 pre emptively, 2-3 if you scout it, I guess), for a 25 to 75 minerals commitment, and you have repair to keep them alive.
No, static defenses don't work the same way for every race in the "agression defense" department, I'm sorry...
(Cannons are good to defend later drops and expansions, but you don't usually have to build cannons before you have a third and are more spread out, that's how it works.)
TL;DR: You cannot re-use cannons later on, cannot place them easily where you want and they are weak against many terran units used in typical pushes.
|
The point of cannons is not only as a "fighting unit" but also to make some things impossible / cost inefficient. It isnt a good idea to do a drop next to a cannon and lose the Medivac right from the start. So this cannon prevents the Terran from "pulling your strings" which is one thing which can tear a Protoss with their basic slow Gateway units apart. Attacking from multiple locations and withdrawing if you look like you will lose is a very efficient way to win and this works best before the Stalkers have Blink, before there are any Colossi and before the Zealots have charge (although they are certainly the weakest of the three units to defend with). The important part is getting through that early phase until you have your mobility / range upgrades and cannons should help A LOT there.
Placing a cannon on a higher level where it cant be hit without vision is also something too rarely done. Lost / Shattered Temple and Metalopolis are two examples where the terrain gives strategic positions which arent really used too much. If a Terran uses a scan to give vision the cannon has already paid for itself (more or less) and Medivacs / Vikings are pretty expensive and at risk if mismicroed close to the cliff.
|
On September 29 2011 20:34 Rabiator wrote:
The point of cannons is not only as a "fighting unit" but also to make some things impossible / cost inefficient. It isnt a good idea to do a drop next to a cannon and lose the Medivac right from the start. So this cannon prevents the Terran from "pulling your strings" which is one thing which can tear a Protoss with their basic slow Gateway units apart. Attacking from multiple locations and withdrawing if you look like you will lose is a very efficient way to win and this works best before the Stalkers have Blink, before there are any Colossi and before the Zealots have charge (although they are certainly the weakest of the three units to defend with). The important part is getting through that early phase until you have your mobility / range upgrades and cannons should help A LOT there.
Placing a cannon on a higher level where it cant be hit without vision is also something too rarely done. Lost / Shattered Temple and Metalopolis are two examples where the terrain gives strategic positions which arent really used too much. If a Terran uses a scan to give vision the cannon has already paid for itself (more or less) and Medivacs / Vikings are pretty expensive and at risk if mismicroed close to the cliff.
Ok I agree.
But as I said, you should not have any problems defending drops before 3 bases (at least I don't), cannons are not required at this stage. When you have 3+ bases, things change, your army begins to be somewhat scary and replenishable so you'll want to be agressive on the map. As minerals become less of a problem in general, throwing down some cannons at some of your expansions, backed up by some high templars is good enough to defend drops efficiently.
But I thought we were discussing the "safety" cannons in the early game in the way Zerg would throw down 1-2 spine crawlers or terran defends his gasless expand or techbuild with a bunker. My point was that it's not possible to do so with protoss against Terran (it's possible against zerg due to their low range units), or at least very inefficient, and you might as well have more units even if they're not very good. At least you can micro with units, not much you can do with cannons :p
|
http://www.gomtv.net/2011aol/vod/66217
To those who said 1 base openings like 1 gate expand and 3 gate expand aren't feasible, watch the first game here of MC vs Nestea. MC goes a very normal 3 gate expand, and Nestea takes a third when MC expands. As you can see in this game, there's really no way for Zerg to hold the third against 3 gate sentry aggression. And that's why it IS possible to go 1 base opening as Protoss vs Zerg in a macro game.
Nothing special happened in this game, and MC only ran off 3 gates when the push occurs. He only made 1 stalker, he simply saw Nestea took a third and knew it wasn't possible to hold against a 3 gate expand. Maybe against 1 gate expand, but not 3 gate expand.
That's not to mention that if 3 gate sentry expand was 'autoloss' and 'puts you too far behind' and 'zerg can just take a third', maps like XNC where you can't FFE would be imbalanced and broken, but we see that's not the case.
Imo if maps are going to put rocks on the third, then the natural should be wide open like XNC to discourage FFE. XNC is actualyl greatly designed in that you can still FFE, or can still take a fast third, but it's very risky rather than just not possible.
|
I think reducing the effectiveness of the macro mechanics would be positive for the competitive aspect of the game.
I also feel that the colossus should be removed in the expansion.
|
On September 29 2011 19:26 Destructicon wrote:
Building defensive structures is in general a bad idea, and everyone at the highest level of play knows it, they only make them in certain specific situations.
To the point, terrans can afford to build bunkers because, they can salvage them at a later time to regain 75% of those resources, bunkers also help protect their vulnerable marines. Also terrans have an abundance of minerals due to mules, but at the highest level of play you still see them keep close to 0 resources even with mules.
However as protoss and as zerg, every defensive structure build is one less something.
As protoss, every cannon is one less gateway, 1 and a half zealot and 1 and a quarter stalker.
You do see players like HuK make a forge fast expand and protect it with 2 cannons, but you must realize that, doing so greatly limits their offensive power, and its more of a deterrent then real protection, only time I've seen pros put down more cannons is when they know a big roach army is incoming and they don't have any units to defend with.
For zerg, every spine crawler and every spore crawler is one less drone, and that is a big deal.
Basically a spine crawler costs 100 minerals, the drone that went into making that spine crawler cost 50 minerals, on top of that the zerg needs to use 1 larva and 50 more minerals to re-make that drone that he sacrificed to build the spine crawler. So the effective cost of building a spine crawler is 200 minerals, and factor in that 1 larva that could have been used to make another unit, or those minerals that could have been used to make 8 lings, 2 roaches, etc.
Again, I only see good zergs put down 1 or 2 spines as a deterrent not as actual protection, and they only invest in spore crawlers in case they know banshee, phoenix/void ray or DT harass is on its way and they only do it on specific timings when they know those threats emerge. For example protoss vs zerg, if the zerg keeps poking and sees the protoss only have 3 sentries for a long time and a couple of zealots, he will know something fishy is up and will react by making spore crawlers and detection, because he knows for sure that gas is going into something either DT or air, spore crawlers countering both.
Even terrans against mass muta harass only make 2 or 3 auto-turrets at specific points like at mineral lines or near production facilities, the backbone of terran defense against mutas is still marines, protection against mutas picking of reinforcements is to send them in a clump, protection against mutas is also better marine control and keeping the muta numbers low.
Actually the best protection against mutas is to keep pressuring the zerg so the mutas can never have the time to raid the mineral lines since investing in protecting the mineral lines just eats away resources.
The only time it might be safe to make defensive buildings is really late game when you are maxed 200/200 and you have already researched everything, and even then it might be better to just make more production facilities.
Your overall point (that defensive structures are bad) is good. I'd just like to note that the effective cost of a spine crawler is 150 minerals and one larva. If I want to make a spine crawler, I build a drone for 50 minerals, and then make it into a spine for 100. If I want to make another drone, that costs another 50 and another larva, but that describes the cost of a spine crawler and a drone, not the cost of just a spine crawler.
The main reason that defensive structures are bad is because they don't move, not because they're weak. Making your defense out of cannons makes you unable to put pressure back on your opponent, so they'll just expand, tech, or otherwise play greedily since you can't stop them.
And it's not that Terrans "can afford" to build defensive structures where other races can't. Other races can "afford" to, it's just that Terrans typically don't have a choice in the situations where they build one. A bunker to defend a 1-1-1 build is because T doesn't have the gas for marauders and marines can't hold any significant pressure by themselves in small numbers. A bunker to defend a fast expand is because Terran can't get up enough units to match the Protoss army under these circumstances.
Even when you got 100% back from bunkers, they were still a huge economic cost. Putting your money in bunkers is a lot like floating money for the time the bunker is up, and has all the bad effects of doing so. That's the main cost to building bunkers (and why you shouldn't build them unless you have to), not the 25 mineral cost.
|
sorry, but having getting an expansion of safe against allmost any attack makes any investment worth it, especially if you get it refunded later on.
|
On October 01 2011 17:47 freetgy wrote:
sorry, but having getting an expansion of safe against allmost any attack makes any investment worth it, especially if you get it refunded later on.
A bunker defense is not "safe against any attack" any more than putting a planetary fortress at an expansion makes that planetary "safe against any attack".
If you do, say, a five or six gate push against an early-expand Terran, then 2-3 bunkers is the only way he can hold. The only way. And even then, it's not guaranteed; he needs to have SCVs nearby for repair, and if force fields block off the repair, then the bunkers are unlikely to actually help very much. Even with good repair bunkers can die fairly easily to superior numbers, and certainly to immortals. And since they occupy such a large space it's hard to get the rest of your army firing while the bunkers are in the front.
There's a reason that Terrans don't plant risky planetary fortresses and bunkers around the map, and why bunker contains are so often ill-fated.
|
On October 02 2011 05:03 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2011 17:47 freetgy wrote:
sorry, but having getting an expansion of safe against allmost any attack makes any investment worth it, especially if you get it refunded later on. A bunker defense is not "safe against any attack" any more than putting a planetary fortress at an expansion makes that planetary "safe against any attack". If you do, say, a five or six gate push against an early-expand Terran, then 2-3 bunkers is the only way he can hold. The only way. And even then, it's not guaranteed; he needs to have SCVs nearby for repair, and if force fields block off the repair, then the bunkers are unlikely to actually help very much. Even with good repair bunkers can die fairly easily to superior numbers, and certainly to immortals. And since they occupy such a large space it's hard to get the rest of your army firing while the bunkers are in the front. There's a reason that Terrans don't plant risky planetary fortresses and bunkers around the map, and why bunker contains are so often ill-fated.
The fact remains, that you can be safe against everything a Protoss can do with 1 rax FE on almost any map (Blink all-ins on TDA notwithstanding). On the other hand, there exist Terran builds that are very difficult to scout, and which kill 1 Gate FE almost 100% of the time. And typical 1 Gate FE actually gets the Nexus significantly later than 1 Rax FE gets the CC. And it's not even a case of skimping on defense, you just physically can't have enough stuff or the right tech out in time.
So yeah, that's another major advantage Terran enjoys in TvP.
|
So, is there anything ghosts DON'T beat in the late game?
|
You can't take a strategy that one race does, and transfer it to another race, and assume it will work the same. 1-rax expo is pretty safe. 1gate FE isn't. Hatchery first is pretty safe. Nexus first isn't. Command Center first is even less safe.
That said, if you wanted to defend a Nexus first with some cannons, that's a well-known and safe enough strat. You need to scout; if you haven't scouted yet you just throw down the forge first instead of the nexus for a slightly less economic play.
In other words, you CAN fast expand against Terran. You CAN'T take Terran builds, and try to transfer them to other races, and assume they should work or else it's imbalanced. The different races have different advantages, and you need to take advantage of your own race's strengths rather than try to go head-to-head against them in areas where they are strong.
|
On October 02 2011 09:05 ChristianS wrote:
You can't take a strategy that one race does, and transfer it to another race, and assume it will work the same. 1-rax expo is pretty safe. 1gate FE isn't. Hatchery first is pretty safe. Nexus first isn't. Command Center first is even less safe.
That said, if you wanted to defend a Nexus first with some cannons, that's a well-known and safe enough strat. You need to scout; if you haven't scouted yet you just throw down the forge first instead of the nexus for a slightly less economic play.
In other words, you CAN fast expand against Terran. You CAN'T take Terran builds, and try to transfer them to other races, and assume they should work or else it's imbalanced. The different races have different advantages, and you need to take advantage of your own race's strengths rather than try to go head-to-head against them in areas where they are strong.
Dude, I'm not talking about a "build no units, Nexus at 20" 1 Gate FE. I'm talking about making stuff out of 1 Gate and then taking the expo around 30 supply. It's not taking a Terran build and transfering it to Protoss. And yes, doing that is unsafe too. There isn't a single Protoss build that can take the natural before the 5:30 mark, and be safe at the same time. Or at least I haven't seen it. I think most of them die to the Marine/Tank all-in anyway.
The funny part is, the later you expand, the harder it is to hold off 1/1/1. So, as a Protoss in PvT, you either get some sort of strong read with your probe and early units, or you just flip the coin and hope for the best. And even if you guess correctly, you're often only even, not even ahead.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
