|
Can we stop talking about nerfing things please? - 9:10 KST |
On August 24 2011 06:56 LagT_T wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 06:13 Razuik wrote:On August 24 2011 06:08 LagT_T wrote:On August 24 2011 05:56 Razuik wrote:On August 24 2011 05:51 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 24 2011 05:48 _Search_ wrote:I honestly don't see how the 1/1/1 all-in is any different than any of the Protoss all-ins. Example: + Show Spoiler +Virus all-ins Genius in yesterday's GSL, so Genius responds by double void-ray all-ining Virus. What it basically comes down to is the game is still being figured out, to the point where specific unit combinations with specific timings will work surprisingly well, until a defense is figured out. Is it op? Definitely. Is it imba? Not so much, cause both races can do it. SC2 is much faster and more efficient than BW so these builds are bound to arise, and honestly, Protoss has had these 1-base all-in builds for months, so they really shouldn't be complaining. It's different because 1-1-1 is significantly harder for P to stop than for T to stop any P all-ins and 1-1-1 isn't even really an all-in. How do you know this? Unless you play both at a high level and have experienced both sides, you cannot make a claim like this. How can you even say that 1-1-1 is not an all-in when you pull about 13 scvs with it? Oh, lemme guess your answer "MULES, MULES ARE THE PROBLEM" The math regarding the economy of this opening in this matchup has already been discussed. Please refer to previous posts before posting retarded shit. Thank you very much. The math was done, but what is done on paper does not always reflect real in game scenarios. The MATH does not always take into account the MICRO ability of the defending protoss. I've posted about this before with no opposition, so please refer to my own previous posts before posting, please. What does micro has to do with minerals mined per second? Let me break down the problem for you, because it seems it is too hard for you to understand it all at once. Just follow the numbers: 1) SCVs + mules > CB + probes, economy-wise, during the early game. 2) Minerals mined per second translates into production capacity. 3) Because of 1) and 2) Terran 1/1/1 outproduces one basing Protoss. 4) The main DPS unit in this build is the marine, which costs only minerals. 5) The variety of support units (banshees, tanks, raven) in this build takes care of the Protoss responses to the marines. 6) Due to 3), 4) and 5), Terran will win after several waves of attack with even army trades because the economic advantage will turn into an army advantage. 7) Protoss fast expand builds counter 1/1/1, but are vulnerable to Terran early pressure. 8) Protoss can't scout in time to see if early pressure or 1/1/1 is coming. See? The problem is not an unbeatable unit combination, it is an economy timing.
Let me put this simply like I have tons of times in this thread. The key to beating this build is a very safe tech expand. (1-gate-gate/2-gate robo expand). It will not be a big issue about how many units you have as long as you delay the push with your superior tech unit (colossus). You can take out scores of marines with a poke for only a few tank shots. As long as you micro correctly, you should only take shield damage from the tanks.
|
I don't banshee's are the issue here. If you watch the most recent GSL match with Genius he gets 1/1/1'ed in the first game except its with marines/siege tanks/meds. The Terran gets stim and combat shields and it seemed to be pretty damn effective. 1/1/1 is just extremely strong in any combination, and while I agree banshee/raven/tank/marine is probably the strongest, there are many variations that are close. Because of these facts changing it would be hard
|
Mmm I just went and rewatched IEM finals and I really really sympathize more and more with protoss. Game 1: MC did almost everything right, held off the first wave, up 20 on supply, stabilizing, 2 observers, charge researching, and the next wave just ends him.
I really expect some kind of patch to happen- not necessarily a buff/nerf, but one that will just weaken the specific timing.
|
On August 24 2011 06:58 tdt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 06:56 Razuik wrote:On August 24 2011 06:54 jinorazi wrote:
i dont mind the whine, the theory crafting, all the conversations but the use of word "all-in" on every fucking build is getting annoying.
definition of all-in is out of hand. So you would consider a build that pulls 15 scvs and gets TONS of tech on 1 base not an all-in? It's not an all in until all 3 waves are done with IMO. You can kill every SCV and whole army and he'll be back 5 min later with same. Usually he does enough damage first time second wave kills.
Despite your extremely flawed facts about how many "waves" they have, it still is considered an all-in (even if you only count the last "wave")
|
On August 24 2011 07:05 Razuik wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 06:58 tdt wrote:On August 24 2011 06:56 Razuik wrote:On August 24 2011 06:54 jinorazi wrote:
i dont mind the whine, the theory crafting, all the conversations but the use of word "all-in" on every fucking build is getting annoying.
definition of all-in is out of hand. So you would consider a build that pulls 15 scvs and gets TONS of tech on 1 base not an all-in? It's not an all in until all 3 waves are done with IMO. You can kill every SCV and whole army and he'll be back 5 min later with same. Usually he does enough damage first time second wave kills. Despite your extremely flawed facts about how many "waves" they have, it still is considered an all-in (even if you only count the last "wave")
Nothing flawed about it. It's 3 waves them you're out of minerals. They can break it off at any time if they do enough damage thus not an all in.
|
On August 24 2011 07:09 tdt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 07:05 Razuik wrote:On August 24 2011 06:58 tdt wrote:On August 24 2011 06:56 Razuik wrote:On August 24 2011 06:54 jinorazi wrote:
i dont mind the whine, the theory crafting, all the conversations but the use of word "all-in" on every fucking build is getting annoying.
definition of all-in is out of hand. So you would consider a build that pulls 15 scvs and gets TONS of tech on 1 base not an all-in? It's not an all in until all 3 waves are done with IMO. You can kill every SCV and whole army and he'll be back 5 min later with same. Usually he does enough damage first time second wave kills. Despite your extremely flawed facts about how many "waves" they have, it still is considered an all-in (even if you only count the last "wave") Nothing flawed about it. It's 3 waves them you're out of minerals. They can break it off at any time if they do enough damage thus not an all in.
Okay lol, show me the replay of these fabled "3 waves". Please I'd love to see it.
|
On August 24 2011 07:04 Razuik wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 06:56 LagT_T wrote:On August 24 2011 06:13 Razuik wrote:On August 24 2011 06:08 LagT_T wrote:On August 24 2011 05:56 Razuik wrote:On August 24 2011 05:51 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 24 2011 05:48 _Search_ wrote:I honestly don't see how the 1/1/1 all-in is any different than any of the Protoss all-ins. Example: + Show Spoiler +Virus all-ins Genius in yesterday's GSL, so Genius responds by double void-ray all-ining Virus. What it basically comes down to is the game is still being figured out, to the point where specific unit combinations with specific timings will work surprisingly well, until a defense is figured out. Is it op? Definitely. Is it imba? Not so much, cause both races can do it. SC2 is much faster and more efficient than BW so these builds are bound to arise, and honestly, Protoss has had these 1-base all-in builds for months, so they really shouldn't be complaining. It's different because 1-1-1 is significantly harder for P to stop than for T to stop any P all-ins and 1-1-1 isn't even really an all-in. How do you know this? Unless you play both at a high level and have experienced both sides, you cannot make a claim like this. How can you even say that 1-1-1 is not an all-in when you pull about 13 scvs with it? Oh, lemme guess your answer "MULES, MULES ARE THE PROBLEM" The math regarding the economy of this opening in this matchup has already been discussed. Please refer to previous posts before posting retarded shit. Thank you very much. The math was done, but what is done on paper does not always reflect real in game scenarios. The MATH does not always take into account the MICRO ability of the defending protoss. I've posted about this before with no opposition, so please refer to my own previous posts before posting, please. What does micro has to do with minerals mined per second? Let me break down the problem for you, because it seems it is too hard for you to understand it all at once. Just follow the numbers: 1) SCVs + mules > CB + probes, economy-wise, during the early game. 2) Minerals mined per second translates into production capacity. 3) Because of 1) and 2) Terran 1/1/1 outproduces one basing Protoss. 4) The main DPS unit in this build is the marine, which costs only minerals. 5) The variety of support units (banshees, tanks, raven) in this build takes care of the Protoss responses to the marines. 6) Due to 3), 4) and 5), Terran will win after several waves of attack with even army trades because the economic advantage will turn into an army advantage. 7) Protoss fast expand builds counter 1/1/1, but are vulnerable to Terran early pressure. 8) Protoss can't scout in time to see if early pressure or 1/1/1 is coming. See? The problem is not an unbeatable unit combination, it is an economy timing. Let me put this simply like I have tons of times in this thread. The key to beating this build is a very safe tech expand. (1-gate-gate/2-gate robo expand). It will not be a big issue about how many units you have as long as you delay the push with your superior tech unit (colossus). You can take out scores of marines with a poke for only a few tank shots. As long as you micro correctly, you should only take shield damage from the tanks.
Economy doesn't kick in on a safe expo build fast enough. A 1gate FE pays for itself at the 9 minute mark going up to 34 probes. If you went 2gate expo or 2gate robo expo, it would pay for itself at the 9:30/10+ mark, which is too late. I can show you the replays of me executing a onegate FE and let you compare the mineral/building/unit counts to a one base execution with exactly the same structures. You can either expo, or have colossus. Having both means you can just die to the push because you have very few other units. A fast colossus costs you 500/400 on top of the robo you'll need against a one base terran anyways. 2fast colossus costs you 800/600 and at this point, you've spent so much on colossus tech that you can die to banshees because you don't have enough anti-air. You say colossus is good against marines, and that's correct. However you will either have enough stalkers to stop banshees+ the colossus without range(not good against siegetank marine banshee, or else a ranged colossus that dies because you have no stalkers to shoot banshees. It's been beaten to death already but you apparently don't understand how many resources you can get. You can get that off of a 15 nexus, but then it's not a safe build at all.
|
Canada13389 Posts
What about the one gate one robo expand that some people have mentioned before? I havent played around with it since Ive been on vacation for 2 weeks but I wonder if that would be helpful at all?
|
I agree that calling this build an all-in is ridiculous. You don't cut SCVs and the build is easy to transition out of. Are we going to call every build that delays your expansion an all-in now?
|
On August 24 2011 07:21 Khenra wrote:
I agree that calling this build an all-in is ridiculous. You don't cut SCVs and the build is easy to transition out of. Are we going to call every build that delays your expansion an all-in now?
You bring your SCVs with it and they don't transition out of it. The "transition" is a 2nd wave of SCVs, marine, banshee and tank.
|
Just brainstorming here but if they have a raven can you feedback the pdd? Might be a bandaid solution if they do not have cloaked banshees if you just feedback banshee/pdd and maybe even the raven.
|
I would like to study this build more closely. What are some good pro-level games to watch where the build is held off/where protoss barely loses (since it's easy enough to find games where P loses to it  )
|
On August 24 2011 07:21 Khenra wrote:
I agree that calling this build an all-in is ridiculous. You don't cut SCVs and the build is easy to transition out of. Are we going to call every build that delays your expansion an all-in now?
We call a 4-gate all-in don't we? But you can TECHNICALLY build a nexus after an attack fails/succeeds. In your definition, nothing but a rush that pulls every single worker is the only thing that can be considered all-in.
|
On August 24 2011 07:27 kheldorin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 07:21 Khenra wrote:
I agree that calling this build an all-in is ridiculous. You don't cut SCVs and the build is easy to transition out of. Are we going to call every build that delays your expansion an all-in now? You bring your SCVs with it and they don't transition out of it. The "transition" is a 2nd wave of SCVs, marine, banshee and tank.
Pulling a bunch of SCVs doesn't make it an all-in. And sending a second wave is a choice depending on how the first attack goes. If the attack was defended succesfully, you can just throw up an expo and some bunkers and add barracks. If you did massive damage on the first attack, of course you're gonna attack a second time and finish him.
|
Blazinghand
United States25552 Posts
On August 24 2011 07:32 Razuik wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 07:21 Khenra wrote:
I agree that calling this build an all-in is ridiculous. You don't cut SCVs and the build is easy to transition out of. Are we going to call every build that delays your expansion an all-in now? We call a 4-gate all-in don't we? But you can TECHNICALLY build a nexus after an attack fails/succeeds. In your definition, nothing but a rush that pulls every single worker is the only thing that can be considered all-in.
I think Khenra's definition is actually about whether or not you cut scvs, not whether or not you pull workers. In that sense, since most 4gates cut workers, the 4 warpgate rush WOULD be an all-in. I think that if you pull workers and have a late expo like the 1/1/1, you're all in in the sense that you need to do damage. However, you have such a strong attack that you almost always do, and due to mules you have good follow-up attacks, so in a certain sense it's an all-in without the uncertainty.
|
On August 24 2011 04:29 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 04:20 Aletheia27 wrote:On August 24 2011 04:00 TheOGBlitzKrieg wrote:
thinking about this now, if you scout after a 9 pylon and throw down a standard 12 gate... if you see no gas then you know it CAN'T be a 1-1-1 so you proceed to either hold off a 1 raxx fe, or a marine scv all in depending on if u scout an expo or not... next, if you SCOUT a gas why can't you just cancel your gate and lay down a 16 nex? then proceed with gates after... is it because it could be a marine maurader poke 2 raxx? i'm not really understanding why this can't be done it seems if you cancelled the gate and layed down the 16 nex then built gates after you could hold this push. and it could set you up to defend the 1-1-1.. but meh maybe i'm wrong iono just a thought this might work..but I think it'd be easier and potentially better to just transition into a 1 Gate FE if you see the gas. Otherwise just delay the expo for more gates >_> This doesn't really solve the problem tough as 2 rax vs 1-1-1 dilema. As you still can't tell after they take their gas... It used to be that you could sacrifice a probe to count the number of marines or see if there's a bunker to try and determine if terran's going for a 1-1-1 or bio...but a good terran player will just keep most of their army back making it difficult to scout... This might sound kinda dumb, but maybe a gas steal is the right move here? The Terran player will have to kill it to get access to a 2nd gas. Does this delay the push at all? I wonder if it's worth the 75 minerals in the early game to delay his gas by a 30 seconds or so. Has anyone used this / fought against this?
this actually sounds like it will help immensely, a gas steal if you scout a terran going gas after raxx will definately slow down a 1-1-1 tank banshee marine push FOR SURE... however it is a complete waste if the terran decides against this build for most every other build... *it also slows down cloak banshee builds
|
On August 24 2011 07:32 Razuik wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 07:21 Khenra wrote:
I agree that calling this build an all-in is ridiculous. You don't cut SCVs and the build is easy to transition out of. Are we going to call every build that delays your expansion an all-in now? We call a 4-gate all-in don't we? But you can TECHNICALLY build a nexus after an attack fails/succeeds. In your definition, nothing but a rush that pulls every single worker is the only thing that can be considered all-in.
4-gate cuts workers completely after 22. And you are stuck with 4 gates that you cannot produce out of if your attack fails.
6-rax off 1-base is an all-in. You cut SCVs after 18 and you're stuck with 6 rax you can't produce out of if your attack fails.
Getting a barracks, factory, and then starport, all while continually producing SCVs, is NOT an all-in. In fact, this is the most normal thing in the world. Throwing down crazy fast expansions and holding off attacks with minimal units isn't something that even existed until 6 years after the release of StarCraft 1.
|
On August 24 2011 07:34 Khenra wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 07:27 kheldorin wrote:On August 24 2011 07:21 Khenra wrote:
I agree that calling this build an all-in is ridiculous. You don't cut SCVs and the build is easy to transition out of. Are we going to call every build that delays your expansion an all-in now? You bring your SCVs with it and they don't transition out of it. The "transition" is a 2nd wave of SCVs, marine, banshee and tank. Pulling a bunch of SCVs doesn't make it an all-in. And sending a second wave is a choice depending on how the first attack goes. If the attack was defended succesfully, you can just throw up an expo and some bunkers and add barracks. If you did massive damage on the first attack, of course you're gonna attack a second time and finish him.
Pulling SCVs in combination with investing in two fairly bad upgrades (for a macro game) instead of stim / combat shield / conc. shells makes it all in. If you don't kill the nexus you're dead, you're putting all your eggs in one basket, that one attack, that's what an all-in is.
|
On August 24 2011 07:32 Razuik wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 07:21 Khenra wrote:
I agree that calling this build an all-in is ridiculous. You don't cut SCVs and the build is easy to transition out of. Are we going to call every build that delays your expansion an all-in now? We call a 4-gate all-in don't we? But you can TECHNICALLY build a nexus after an attack fails/succeeds. In your definition, nothing but a rush that pulls every single worker is the only thing that can be considered all-in.
All-in is a wildly overused and misunderstood term.
It's ubiquity has essentially translated the term into "really big attack that has a high chance of winning, on however many bases the person is on." I've even heard Artosis say something like, oh, wow, it's looks like Player X might be going all in on three bases.
Besides it being a really misunderstood term (not implying Artosis doesn't know the correct meaning, he does) it has become a crutch-term for players to dismiss their shortcomings.
"Oh, he all-in'd me, that's why I lost."
Someone who is truly all-in will gg when the attack fails. You see this happen all the time. The term has a really negative connotation because the community tends to favor macro-style play as a display of skill. It's the metacommunity affecting the metagame.
|
On August 24 2011 07:34 Khenra wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 07:27 kheldorin wrote:On August 24 2011 07:21 Khenra wrote:
I agree that calling this build an all-in is ridiculous. You don't cut SCVs and the build is easy to transition out of. Are we going to call every build that delays your expansion an all-in now? You bring your SCVs with it and they don't transition out of it. The "transition" is a 2nd wave of SCVs, marine, banshee and tank. Pulling a bunch of SCVs doesn't make it an all-in. And sending a second wave is a choice depending on how the first attack goes. If the attack was defended succesfully, you can just throw up an expo and some bunkers and add barracks. If you did massive damage on the first attack, of course you're gonna attack a second time and finish him.
So why does cutting workers mean an all-in while sacrificing your scvs not considered an all-in. Both are dependant on how much you want to sacrifice economy for more damage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
