Just try to play photon rush and then go straight into carriers. I heard you can reach GM with that, even if you have less than apm. This guy probably does not know what is a build order. No thinking just MMM every match up.
Didnt build enough workers, drop some mules. Protoss or Terran for low APM gamer. Post a Reply. I've been playing SC2 for about a month or so now, and I want to pick a race and start working more seriously on my builds and matchups. The following is an extract from my blog , and I'd appreciate the advice of more experienced gamers. Preemptive edit: I know there is a tendancy to respond to the "help me pick a race" topics with "just pick the one you like and get on with it".
Well that's easy enough, I really like the Terrans right now - although Protoss also seem really cool. However, in this case I am considering two specific issues that I think may become long term problems, and I am hoping that more experienced gamers will be able to tell me whether these problems are real, or simply imagined. As promised, I spent some time this weekend looking at how to extend the 3 Rax build after the push fails to knock an opponent out completely.
I did not actually play many more ladder games, but I do have some more replays from before this weekend to post over the next few days or so. Despite the lack of ladder matches this weekend, the mid-game exercise has been very useful, and it has focused my mind on some of the decisions I need to make.
How we got here. While not exactly crushing my opponents, I have used the 3 Rax build with a certain degree of success. More importantly, though, I feel that the structure provided by the 3 Rax build has been giving me a framework with which to learn and improve. Using the same build in every in matchup has given me benchmarks to measure myself against. I know that at time X I should have Y units and Z upgrades. Anything less than that is poor play, and my mechanics are at fault - that's a clear incentive to develop crisper play.
I also get to see a myriad of other strategies ie, my opponents measured against the known quantities of my own build, which helps me understand other builds and races, in addition to my own. Because the build is rigid, I've been forced to find micro solutions where I might otherwise have looked for macro solutions. So all told, I'm very happy with where this approach has taken me, and I would whole heartedly recommend it to any other new player. Why it's time to move on.
That said, I am starting to feel a little restless. I'm not going to pretend that I've reached the limits of the build, or that I'm playing it perfectly.
Some people have taken 3 Rax all the way to Masters, and I am nowhere near that level. However, I am gaining enough experience to see the limits to 3 Rax, and to want focus on something else. To begin with, 3 Rax is actually quite slow, with the early game is devoted to building infrastructure to support later troop production. A perfectly executed 4 Gate, for example, will hit at about , which is 2 whole minutes earlier than 3 Rax hits.
It's also quite hard to build on 3 Rax after the push. My testing this weekend shows me that I either need to cut unit production which seems bad after losing a bunch of units, and also begs the question as to why I built so many production facilities in the first place or actually tech up quite slowly, around the constant unit production.
That, in and of itself, is not actually too bad. After all, I would have a large army to fall back on. However, it's a large, one dimensional army. The units are not terribly mobile no Medivacs , have little reach no Tanks , and die fairly easily to AOE effects all Bio. To top it off, I lack the ability to produce hard counters. For this reason, I don't actually think that working on a mid-game for 3 Rax is the right approach; an all-in is probably better.
And practicing all-ins exclusively is going to leave me as a fairly one dimensional player. So, it's time for me to move on. The Terran option. After asking myself the "what next" question, I've got two potential answers. If I want to stick with Terrans, I would probably switch to a build. I'm actually really impressed by this build, as it unlocks so much fun stuff early in the game.
While the early build does not change much between matches, the units produced can be customised to the enemy Hellions against Zerg, etc , so it would be a step towards having completely different openings against each race.
The build also supports early aggression. A back of the envelope calculation would put a fast Medivac drop at about , the same time as an early 4 Gate. While unlikely to completely knock an opponent out, it does give me an early game focus and a way to apply pressure before expanding. I like that. And because all the tech paths are unlocked early, it should be much easier to respond to specific threats with solid counters - getting early Thor's against Muta harass, for example.
All told, this is a build that looks like loads of fun. The Terran problem. It's not all kittens and rainbows in Terran-land, though. This makes sense, of course. When you look at Terran and Protoss, you can see that while Protoss probably requires more APM for base management you Chronoboost twice as often as you MULE, and warping in units requires more button clicks than just ordering them from the Barracks , Terran units have more activated abilities than Protoss units.
So in combat, while each side has casters that need to be controlled, Terrans are also doing a host of other things with their units that pushes their APM upwards. The difficulty for me, though, is that I know that APM especially spontaneous, rather than planned APM is one of my big weaknesses as a gamer.
That's why I suck at FPS games, but do rather better at games like EVE, which focus less on reflexes and more on understanding mechanics. My fear is that I'm going to put a great deal of effort into learning to play Terran, only to find that I have a fairly low skill ceiling because my APM peaks too low.
The zerg is often considered the "hard" race, BUT if you're willing to work with their play-style it can also give great results and be very rewarding at the same time.
The Protoss forces are more mobile than the Terrans but can expect to be outmaneuvered by the Zerg. The Protoss are strong against the zerg in a tight chokepoint, but should fight the Terrans on open ground.
They can expand to a new base early, or live off of 1 base for some time The Protoss doesn't really have a definite weakness, but it doesn't specialize either. The mech player's job is to weather the harassment of their opponent for long enough to build an unstoppable killing machine. Low mineral requirement means that you can spend lots of Orbital Command energy on Scanner Sweeps.
Few options to pressure an opponent. Mech will be on the back foot for most of the game, responding to the opponent and mitigating losses. Losing a mech army is disastrous the resource requirements for rebuilding are so huge that losing one army most likely means losing the game.
Despite the low micro requirement, mech requires an impeccable understanding of positioning to function any misplaced units are likely to be picked off, and losing even a few units is severe.
Finally, we have Zerg, possibly the strongest race at the moment though not by that much , and your author's main race. Zerg's unique larva-based economy gives it the most potential to grow huge and take over the map, but its units' individual weakness means that Zerg is usually disadvantaged in the early game. The classic Zerg style is to expand quickly, absorbing the opponent's early pressure, before leveraging its massive economy to overwhelm its opponent with sheer numbers.
Modern Zerg play has more options for efficiency and aggression; the recent addition of the Lurker means that Zerg can hold positions much more effectively, and the rise of Nydus play gives Zergs an option for midgame attacks. But the foundation of Zerg is its exponential growth and corresponding army size if overwhelming your opponent with volume sounds appealing, then Zerg is the race for you.
The larva mechanic allows Zerg to grow much faster than the other races, eventually producing dozens of units at a time. Spreading creep and Overlords give Zergs easy vision and map control, forcing the opponent to try to contain it.
Zerg can change tech paths more easily than any other race, often catching an opponent with an unfavorable composition. Zerg's early game is arguably the hardest in the game, requiring pinpoint "just enough" defenses to be viable. Zerg armies tend to lose in straightforward engagements, relying on clever angles and distractions to survive. Despite having the largest potential economy, Zerg bases can be difficult to hold; Zergs require constant re-expansion, and containment play is a nightmare scenario.
Skip to main content. Level up. Earn rewards. Your XP: 0. Updated: 17 Jul am.
0コメント