|
To overcome imbalance, a player should look for unit compositions that can beat the imbalance, then look for unorthodox ways to reach those unit compositions. A build order, or branch of a build order should be focused on both reaching a unit composition and forcing the enemy into a weaker unit composition.
An amazing example of this is the 3 stalker rush vs 4 gate. The 3 gate robo unit composition was the goal. The problem? 4 gate came too early to get the unit composition to beat it. With a goal in mind, IMYongHwa no doubt pondered about what allowed the 4 gate to reach his base so quickly. The result was a completely new build that changed the pvp metagame hugely.
One might say that this "unit composition goal" only works well with protoss; they have units that Day[9] likes to call "power units". Every protoss is thinking of ways to get a death ball. Do zergs have the same though process? The answer is no.
Potential for zerg can be seen. Goal: to have a unit composition superior to colossus void ray. What unit composition is that? Double upgraded muta corruptor, the corruptor to muta ratio determined by the protoss' ratio of phoenix, void rays and stalkers. This is comparable to the zergling roach mix.
Phoenixes have two attacks of 5. A corruptor has 4 armor with two armor upgrades, reducing phoenix damage to only 2. Mutalisks have three glaive wurm bounces: 9 (+1.000), 3 (+0.333), 1 (+0.111) for a total of 1.444 damage per upgrade. Two attack upgrades massively boost their damage. Void rays do 6(+1) damage to mutas, making muta armor very effective.
Corruptors can chase the pheonix while mutas attack the void rays, which want to stay still to keep their charge and due to their slow move speed.
I have tested, and the muta corruptor composition with upgrades works versus void ray colossus. Now, with that composition in mind, how can a zerg reach it in reaction to signs of voidray colo? There are thousands of ways, and quite a few of them would be valid, reactive build orders. The hundreds of high level players would undoubtedly be able to find these build orders.
Zergs can control a game is many ways:
Putting expansions across the map.
Double expanding.
High aggression with banelings.
Muta harass.
Burrow harass.
All these force a terran or protoss to play differently and can be used as a stepping stone on the way to a situation with unorthodox unit compositions triumphing over forced or delayed enemy builds. JulyZerg used lower econ banelings in reaction to IMmvp's build and, if they didn't kill him, they could have made the game lead into a situation where a certain unit composition would be 'overpowered'. This is similar to when a protoss cannon rushes into an unstoppable 4 gate, or when a protoss forces hydras then goes colossus.
So, my message is this: Find popular protoss/terran armies and think of compositions that are good verses them. How can that composition be reached in time to not die? Does the enemy's build have a vulnerability that can be exploited on the way to your unit composition? Can the enemy push be delayed? Can the enemy always be forced to change their composition? All of these questions I find are not being thought of nearly enough. Even in brood war new builds are being found and these questions being answered. In SC2, a much newer game, it is even easier to answer these questions and completely change the metagame. Feel free to use this thread in a manner that I did with the corruptor mutalisk composition, but potentially with actual results.
|
Great post. Little light on any sort of details, but that wasn't the intent of it, so well done.
Sadly, those who would most benefit from this post aren't likely to take the time to read it because its much easier just to shout imbalance.
|
This seems like a disguised XvZ is imba thread.
For Protoss armies, (if possible) deny scouting. That means overseers/queens/spores, and speedlings.
I just lost like 3 games vs Z because I've been practicing this build that I saw on a stream with sentry fast-expand into colossi, but everytime, the Zerg went muta. I had no idea what the Zerg was up to, and taking the opposite tech tree "counters" sentry/stalker/colossi deathball.
|
As a zerg player myself, I felt that my zerg examples would have the most truth in them. The philosophy can be applied to anyone's play.
|
Canada10567 Posts
On February 24 2011 16:16 mizU wrote:
This seems like a disguised XvZ is imba thread.
For Protoss armies, (if possible) deny scouting. That means overseers/queens/spores, and speedlings.
I just lost like 3 games vs Z because I've been practicing this build that I saw on a stream with sentry fast-expand into colossi, but everytime, the Zerg went muta. I had no idea what the Zerg was up to, and taking the opposite tech tree "counters" sentry/stalker/colossi deathball.
Usually I get hallucinate soon after a 3gate expo. Hallucinate finishes around the 7:40-8:00 mark where you can hallucinate a phoenix and decide where to go from there. A spire going up means get up to 6 gates, pull guys off expo gas, and go roll him, massing roach hydra off 2 base means get some tech up in a hurry, possibly throw down a few cannons, etc. Really 2 forcefields' of energy is completely worth the knowledge of what the zerg is doing. You really don't want to play a guessing game most of the time.
|
To overcome imbalance, a player should look for unit compositions that can beat the imbalance, then look for unorthodox ways to reach those unit compositions.
???
If you can beat something by simply using a different unit composition, then there is no "imbalance" that you are overcoming.
And why would you be looking for unorthodox ways to reach a unit composition? You should just be looking to reach it, if you can reach it by playing standard, no reason to go for something unorthodox.
And unit composition isnt everything, in fact, its almost nothing in the grand scheme of things.
In your example of the 3 stalker rush, its not some kind of "unit composition" that makes it work. Omg, stalkers, how did come no one ever thought about making stalkers vs a 4gate??
Its not the unit composition, the stalkers. Its when the stalkers are made, and what they do, agressively moving out and denying pylons.
How you get to a unit composition, and how you use your units, is most of the time way more important than the actual units you are getting.
Does the enemy's build have a vulnerability that can be exploited on the way to your unit composition? Can the enemy push be delayed? Can the enemy always be forced to change their composition?
Those are the absolutely correct questions.
Not something like "hes making unit X, let me check the in-game unit counter list and find something to counter it, and then mass that!"
|
I thought Day[9] called them ''meat units''?
And it's great to see someone take a logical approach such a thing.
Note on the Mutas attack ups it is always rounded down so with 2 attack ups you will only get a +2 damage to the first attack not the bounces.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
