Starcraft II 101 - General Understanding I approach everything with an ROI (Return on Investment) analysis. Before investing our time/effort/resources into anything, it is important to make sure that our ROI is worthwhile. I do not like to approach things in terms of: Is this good/bad? Instead, I usually see it as: I invest this in return for this. This allows for more flexible/fluid gameplay that is not so rigid that it breaks in unpracticed situations. Case in point: I remember being astounded when watching a BW game where a Protoss accidently makes a Citadel one tile too far to the left, affecting the collection of gas in his main's assimilator.
Now most of us know that 3 peons collecting gas collect at over a 95% efficiency rate. This is ingrained into us pretty early. Obviously this progamer knew this very well. So what does he do? he builds a second Citadel and has his zealot/goon army destroy his first one!
All this because the progamer was too inflexible in his approach: his mind was stuck on 3 peons per assim. A more flexible approach would be to see cost of Citadel (150/100), know the mining rate of a probe on mineral/gas, and decide that 4 probes on gas would the best available solution.
Needless to say the progamer lost the game. This series is intended for players looking to improve in skill level, particularly with BoX (Best of X) series in mind. This is a slower-paced, long-term improvement plan that focuses on developing fundamentals first rather than starting with quick fixes. To reap the maximum benefit from the series, you will want to incorporate things you learned from previous series into your play as you advance. Q: Will this series help me get to Diamond as fast as possible?A: No. I recommend studying an aggressive building order. The shorter the game, the less time there will be for an opponent to expose your lack of fundamentals. A: Probably not. While you may learn quite a bit, it's often very difficult, however, to retain what we have learned a couple days ago and continue implementing it. A: Only for a few lessons in. This series is aimed for someone looking to pull the Bruce Lee, something that is far more possible in SC2 than SC:BW. The best style to have is to have no style. Each guide in this series is not meant to be read once, digested, and implemented. This is very important to understand, as trying to do everything immediately will actually hinder your development as a player! I will do my best to section the series into a "Request to Know" basis. This means that most information will be separated as to not overwhelm yet still provide enough detail for those that want every detail. Also, I will try to output two of these every three weeks or so.
Starcraft II - 101
General Understanding
Previously, I was criticized for using obscure language or speaking in vagaries. I was not catering to a wide enough population for my readers' tastes. With this in mind, I start this series with a much lower minimum knowledge threshold.
Much of this lesson you may know innately or through experience. But it is important to:
A) Bring everyone to agreement on the ideas
B) Have us all using the same terms
To play the game, we need to know the rules. The requisite background intel. The lingo so we can discuss intelligently how to improve. The things that can be adjusted, the things that can't. We see it all the time, people not accepting the rules that can't be adjusted and losing as a result. Or worse, someone who doesn't know the rules losing by default. Don't let this be you.
Victory!
We shall assume that we want to win. Then we must remember that the only way to win is to be the last one in game remaining with buildings. This is not open to debate.
This may seem obvious at first sight, but let's break it down anyways.
Notice the conditions say nothing about who has the better army. Who has the better tech. Who has better upgrades. Who has more workers. What playstyles were implemented.
Raging against this rule does nothing for you, it's immutable. If you draw when you should won because of disregarding this rule, you are the only one to blame. Ask NonY, who "conquered" *Incineration Zone* with his ground army but failed to destroy the last floating barracks. While the Terran in this case isn't the type of player you may enjoy mass gaming with, he certainly is playing fair. He's being neither disrespectful nor egregiously cheating.
Keep your eye on the prize and do not let this happen to you.
So if our goal is to unburden our opponent of his buildings or to invite him to leave the game, how do we usually do this? Usually, the best way is to have a local tactical advantage at the game-deciding battles. What's this mean? Read on!
Advantage
The idea of advantage is very simple: their role is to help you to win. If someone has all of the advantages, then they almost always win. The complications arise when each side has different advantages to differing degrees.
TacticalIf we were all to fight right this second, who would win? Having a tactical advantage has the most potential to be a game-deciding advantage. It is almost impossible to overcome a tactical advantage that is used properly. But the key word here is: used. The process of securing this tactical advantage usually means sacrificing in one of more other potential advantages. So what are the pros/cons to Tactical advantages? And what types of tactical advantages are there? Pros:ControlBecause of the potentially game-deciding nature of tactical advantages, they put you in the driver seat. You dictate the pace of play. If the opponent does not react to you, you can take the game immediately. Tactical advantages are very straightforward. It is usually very obvious what you need... to get a tactical advantage. Using a tactical advantage is as simple as telling your units to attack. The AI even helps you utilize your advantage! It doesn't get any easier than that. Short Lifecycle/Diminishing Returns (DR)/OnusIf you have a tactical advantage of 3 units in a 6 units to 3 units lineup, and you both add one unit, your tactical advantage will have dropped from 100% to 75%.
If your units are slightly better upgraded in a potential battle, and but your opponent is finishing up his research for a counter/mirror to your upgrade, your tactical advantage can disappear in a second!
There are many examples of this, but the end idea is that having a tactical advantage puts the onus on you to abuse it. You pay a dear price for the privilege of dictating pace of play. You will necessarily lose in one or more other advantages to have a tactical advantage. Usually, these same advantages you deemed less worthy will prevent you from maintaining an unused tactical advantage. Tactical advantages convert into other advantages very poorly. Usually you are already at a disadvantage in those areas, so you even have to play catchup there. If we take everything we have, from peons to army units, buildings, and even mules to battle, what's the result? The extent of your GTA/disadvantage gives you a general idea of where your army should be. Generally the more overwhelming your GTA is, the closer your army should be to his production line. The more overwhelming your opponent's GTA is, the closer your army should be to the best tactical position close to your production line. For those that will be taking part in a potential battle, which side will win? It is very important to remember that battles are not won with GTA, but rather LTA. It doesn't matter if you have 200 marines if they're spread all around the map and his 30 mutas are picking you off one by one. You may have the GTA, but if you're not in his base utilizing it, he can abuse LTA and win the game. The 3 keys to securing LTA:MobilityWhether you can outrun your opponents or if you can fly/jump/blink over rather than walk around, mobility is a very powerful tool in securing LTA. When you can choose the point of engagement, you can decide to only attack when you have LTA, and to run when you don't. Creep Tumor, Fungal Growth, FF, Vortex, PDD, Nukes, Storm
The sheer number of spells to ensure LTA can often be overwhelming. A single spell can often dramatically change the landscape of the battle, or even change who's even in the battle. Whenever possible, prioritize micro with either securing or denying LTA. Whether you see a drop coming and position a few stalkers in range to pick off the medivacs, or you realize that you are actually being attacked at two points and prevent your opponent from having an overwhelming LTA (even just 5 units) at your backdoor, preparation can often translate an opponent's GTA into your own GTA with an overwhelming LTA at the critical battle. FlaSh, Leta, Dropships vs Turrets... By simply having more units than your opponent There are two main ways to obtain a NTA, and they both translate to very different games. Earlier Production Building[s]If you obtain a NTA simply by making unit producing buildings earlier than your opponent, then you are on a timer to use/abuse your NTA immediately. This type of NTA suffers greatly from gradual DR (GDR). This type of NTA assuming equal in other advantages suggests that you have a Pass/Fail(P/F) DR. Usually, your opponent will have invested in another type of advantage and has either gotten returns from his investment or not. You will want to abuse your NTA right before he has converted his other advantage to an LTA. Having a specific tech/upgrade over your opponent that he can not counter [efficiently]. TTAs suffer almost exclusively from P/F DR. Sometimes, your opponent has no counter (Voidray vs Marauder). Sometimes they can't counter them efficiently (1/0 zealots vs 0/0 lings Zealots two-shot lings rather than 3 shot). And sometimes they can't counter them effectively because of other reasons (Banshee vs Hydra - Mobility, Cloak, Marine/Tank/Hellion Hard Counters Hydra). Regardless, you usually need to abuse TTA pretty hard to recoup your investment. They may catch up in tech to nullify your TTA or overwhelm in NTA to negate your TTA. Potential to create a future tactical advantage |
|
