1901

Sure thing.

2v2 - We’re Protoss/Zerg vs. a Terran/Zerg on High Orbit. Thought we were in trouble early on but it shows the importance of having map control and keeping tabs on what the opponent is doing. I did a good amount of damage and kept their forces scattered through Mutalisk harrass.
http://www.gamereplays.org/starcraft2/replays.php?game=33&show=details&id=143783

1v1 - TvP on Metalopolis. Protoss went 2-Gate into Warpgate/Robo and I just went Terran Bio with a couple banshees. Other player was kinda a dick.
http://www.gamereplays.org/starcraft2/replays.php?game=33&show=details&id=143781

1v1 - PvP on Blistering Sands - I used DTs to good effect to take control midgame.
http://www.gamereplays.org/starcraft2/replays.php?game=33&show=details&id=136713

1v1 - ZvT Baneling Bust - Here’s how to execute a basic baneling bust strategy on a Terran who uses Supply Depots in his wall.
http://www.gamereplays.org/starcraft2/replays.php?game=33&show=details&id=136711

1902

That 2v2 was very interesting. I’m surprised you kept with the mutalisks considering how hard both players were countering them.

Your partner would have more luck with the zealot/stalker combo if he got the stalkers out of the way of the zealots.

PS
I can’t believe how fast your cracklings shredded the hydralisks down at the end.

1903

Mutalisks only get countered if you get them into a stand-up battle with a sizable number of ground forces that can shoot up. The only reason that should ever happen is as a last ditch defense against a push against either your Main or a critical expansion. Otherwise with sufficient micro you can do a remarkable amount of damage all over the map. A lot of times I see people get their Mutalisks killed fighting things they should not have been fighting - it’s the same syndrome people get into with Reapers all the time. You’ll see people do things like sacrifice 5 Mutas to kill 12 Marines - considering Mutas cost over 4 times as much as a Marine this is a horrible trade.

I knew that as long as we controlled their ability to expand and kept a tab on where their army was we’d be in okay shape. Also I knew that once I got cracklings their anti-Muta army would basically melt, so I was happy for them to keep “countering” me.

One side benefit of muta harrass is that it very specifically requires attention and effort to counter even if you have the right units. There were battles where you can tell that the focus of our opponents was on chasing mutas - their armies lost handedly a couple fights that they really should have either won or broke even on if they had been paying more attention.

1904

A very nice commented game illustrating this:


I really recommend that youtube channel. The comments are very relaxed and full of “What I/he should have done is” for tips. The commenter also likes cheese and oddball strategies which are very fun to watch.
He mostly comments his own games which has certain advantages as he can relay his intentions and impressions from the game.

1905

Who here actually understands the ladder system?

I read the very dense Team Liquid Posts (2), but they spend a lot of time talking theory and seem to skip over some basics. And as detailed as those posts are, they are incredibly hard to parse and keep conflating WoW arena with SC2.

Here’s a basic question which is probably me being dumb – what the heck are the “points” next to everyone’s name in the ladder listing?

I’m currently 6th my bronze league, it says I have 511 “Points”. It’s not my bonus pool (I have 175), it’s not my achievement points.

I thought this might be the “MMR” team liquid is talking about, but they keep saying that’s hidden, and the numbers don’t seem to match up at all. I just played a very weak player who was ranked gold, but had 0 “Points” next to his name. Our own Reldan who is a diamond player has 466 “Points”.

Confusing!

1906

This post by sirlin should explain what the points are and the reasoning behind them:

http://www.sirlin.net/blog/2010/7/24/analyzing-starcraft-2s-ranking-system.html

Basically, the points don’t matter, they are just a way to reward you after each match. They determine your position within your bracket. The brackets are just an arbitrary grouping that also doesn’t matter.

All that really matters is your ELO-esque rank, which you can’t see. This determines your league(bronze, silver, gold, etc) and is used for matchmaking.

1907

I didn’t know the Electric Light Orchestra had ranks.

1908

try harder, maybe go for a knock knock joke next time.

1909

Basically what Angrycoder said. It’s meaningless. The number exists for you to have something go up when you win games. It’s supposed to make you want to play more.

1910

My hand has been hurting from playing too much SC2. I think the 3v3 AI games are a blast especially on hard or very hard. I remember a game I played a couple nights ago, still have the replay. It was a 3v3 very hard ai, both of my allies ended up leaving and we all thought it was over. That was until I started getting some carriers out… one after another and ended up with over 8 pretty quick. I could not believe I actually won that game in the end with all those carriers. One of the most memoriable SC games I ever played even since the first one.

1911

Apologies if this has been asked already, but is there a way to add friends from the webpage, or just from in-game? I am tired of work and want to slack off.

1912

Thanks for that link. Very helpful post.

I do like some things about the system he describes – the fact that a player who hasn’t played in a while will actually be more likely to win a few games when they come back is great. However, I’m not buying this inscrutable and meaningless points system is going to make people feel a sense of progress. They’d be better off just piling on more random achievements, because achievement points already serve that role.

1913

It might not be very funny, but it’s sort of correct. The rating is called Elo, after Arpad Elo, and ELO is the Electric Light Orchestra (and possibly other things as well of course).

1914

Next you’ll tell me FAX isn’t an acronym, either.

1915

Stupid strategy that has worked 6 games in a row.

I have a protoss partner that is pretty good (top of platinum) that I play with often. Downside is that his girlfriend gets in the action sometimes. She plays terran, and isn’t very good. She gets the basics, but doesn’t have the speed/micro ability necessary for complex maneuvers. While toss and I go fight, she usually masses marines/thors and defends our base which has a certain level of effectiveness.

Well, the three of us just start a match and she disconnects right away. That sucks, but I load up her scvs into her command center and float her to a nearby island with a high yield. To this point, I wasn’t sure if you could still get money from a missing partners’ scvs. I know you can control their units, and build from their factories, but I’ve never noticed their SCVs adding to my mineral income. I have her SCVs mine away from the high yield and notice that my mineral income is hitting odd numbers. Yaaay, she’s mining me money!

So, I have her mining blissfully at the high yield while toss partner and I bulk up. We get rushed, we defend well enough, and are already reaping the benefits of the high yield as we are continuously popping out zealots/marines/phoenix. We counter, and wipe out the three with a steady stream of offense. After we take out the 1st guy, I already have a full “block” (sorry, don’t know how many fit in the unit selection screen) of marines, and a full block of vikings. The marines die eventually, but the vikings come in to clean up.

I mention to toss partner that his girlfriend is more useful farming for us, so the next match we try that same strategy with her mass mining. She just feeds us minerals/gas, we bulk up, and shred our opponents who just aren’t capable of keeping up that early. If there is a nearby high yield island she floats to it right away.

It’s so stupidly hilarious.

We died the 7th game, because we got a little sloppy from the success. An enemy terran had early med evacs. He was heading to drop some marines behind a mineral line, but he happened across her high yield. Wiped her out right away, which left us open for their combined forces. So it isn’t perfect, but it’s pretty effective with an early high yield, or up to 3 bases just feeding us income.

1916

I saw a similar strategy on Husky or HD’s channel in 2v2 games. One player goes protoss, and takes care of all the micro. The other player is terran, and if he’s in a shared base, all he does is build orbital commands at all the expansions and goes mule crazy, farming the money for the toss to max his army quickly. Seemed to work relatively well!

1917

Yay! Blizzard removed the authenticator from SC2!! So if I lose it again, at least I can play SC2 while waiting for a replacement.

1918

Therlun, thanks very much. That’s a brilliant link.

1919

You would think that if you let the game go on too long it is a max 600 supply army versus a max 400 supply army and then you’re fucked. What you could do is have her play normally but have her share control and just treat her army units as part of your army, and let her take care of all the macromanagement of all the bases (continually building SCVs and probes, expanding when you attack, etc.)

EDIT: I always share all control in team games, that way one guy can be in charge of the battle, one guy can be in charge of emergency base defence, etc.

1920

I’ve seen that strategy in Brood War 2v2 and 4v4. I don’t think it ever worked competitively where scouting is very good, but it’s really abusive in pub matches. Typically though it was a Zerg player farming up a Terran or Protoss for quick tank/reaver drops or super-fast Carriers/BCs, since the Zerg could farm so well in SC1.