monk Profile Blog Joined May 2009 United States 8468 Posts Last Edited: 2012-04-19 02:37:25 #1



Early Early Game: Scouting:

A few scout timings are popular in modern PvP:

12 scout: This scout timing accomplishes the same thing as a post-12 scout, except it allows you to pass through the common proxy/cannon locations in addition to scouting your opponent’s base. It also guarantees you will find your opponent on a 4-player 4-spawn map.



This scout timing accomplishes the same thing as a post-12 scout, except it allows you to pass through the common proxy/cannon locations in addition to scouting your opponent’s base. It also guarantees you will find your opponent on a 4-player 4-spawn map. Post 12 scout: On non 4-player 4-spawn maps, it guarantees entrance to your opponent's base before his stalker pops out. This allows you to scout such things as gas timing, number of chronoboosts on his nexus, number of gateways he has, number of gas/timing of his gas, number of probes he has on his gas, and whether he has made a zealot. The main thing this does is allows is judge possibility of low gas strategies(4 gate, robo 4 gate) or high gas strategies(dt, phoenix, fast blink stalkers).



On non 4-player 4-spawn maps, it guarantees entrance to your opponent's base before his stalker pops out. This allows you to scout such things as gas timing, number of chronoboosts on his nexus, number of gateways he has, number of gas/timing of his gas, number of probes he has on his gas, and whether he has made a zealot. The main thing this does is allows is judge possibility of low gas strategies(4 gate, robo 4 gate) or high gas strategies(dt, phoenix, fast blink stalkers). No scout: Players who don’t scout are either confident they can hold off proxies and cannon rushes without scouting or confident their opponents won't cheese them. With the money saved from not probe scouting, you can afford an extra zealot and use it to do a 2 zealot/2 stalker poke as an alternative to scouting. This is commonly done by the StartaleQ Protosses (Parting, Squirtle, Naniwa, Sase). With no scout openings, a player has to initially account for the possibility of a 4 gate even if his opponent gets a quick 2 gas, because he can't scout otherwise.

Looking for 4 gate

If you learn the hints that a 4 gate is coming, you can get in the mindsets of the players themselves when they're scouting. How afraid are they of being 4 gated? How greedy are they playing with regards to the perceived possibility of aggression?

The following are hints that a 4 gate are coming:

Two or fewer chronoboosts are used on non-warpgates.

You don't see a 3rd pylon.

There is no chronoboost on the first stalker.

There is no 2nd gas.

You notice a slight probe cut.



The following are hints that a 4 gate may not be coming, but it is not definitive proof:

Three chronoboosts are used on non-warpgates.

You see a 3rd plyon started.

Your opponent starts a 2nd gas.

Your opponent finishes a 2nd gas.



If you see any of the the following, a standard 4 gate is not coming:

Four chronoboosts are used on non-warpgates.

The 3rd pylon is completed.

Your opponent mines from his 2nd gas for more than 30 seconds.



Early Game: Openings:

90% of openings boil down to either a standard 1 gate opening or a standard 2 gate opening.

1 gate opening: + Show Spoiler + Core

Zealot

2nd Gas

Stalker

Warpgates

Pylon

Stalker

The two possible transitions from a 1 gate opening are 1 gate into tech building or 1 gate into 3 gate

1 gate tech: Contrary to popular belief, a 1 gate tech opening is able to defend any 4 gate. For more information, check this thread. I will say, however, that this is a very tight hold that requires perfect control and timing. If, however, you can get away with it, you will usually end up in a very favorable position. For example, you will be able to hit 7:10 dts, a 7:00 10 stalker blink attack, or a very fast colossi all-in. Even if you don't opt for aggressive options, you will be in the dark for a shorter amount of time with either observers of phoenix.

1 gate into 3 gate: There are 2 main reasons one would opt for a 3 gate opening over a 1 gate tech opening. The first and by far less common reason is that they're not confident in their 1 gate defense versus 4 gate and highly suspect their opponent is opting for a 4 gate strategy. Before the patch that nerfed 4 gates, you pretty much had to get at least 3 gates to defend a 4 gate so many players still get 3 gates as an effect from that era.



The second is to put on the very common 3 gate aggressive pressure. By putting on this pressure, it allows you to both force mistakes from your opponent(too many sentries or losing unnecessary units) and scout him. Often you can either scout an expansion or just learn a lot from what he's using to defend your aggression. On the flip side, your opponent can read your 3 gate aggression and figure out what strategies you're limited to. For example, 3 gate into phoenix or dt isn't very viable and if the 3 gate player opts for blink, it will be very late.



Spoiler The two possible transitions from a 1 gate opening are 1 gate into tech building or 1 gate into 3 gate 2 gate opening: + Show Spoiler +

Cybernetics Core

2nd Gateway

2nd Gas

Stalker

Warpgates

Pylon

2 Stalkers

The 2 gate opening, commonly known as the 3 stalker opening, is the other common opener in PvP. It relies on the dominance in the early game of your initial 3 stalkers to deny the initial proxy pylon on the map. One version of a standard defensive 2 gate/3 stalker opening can be found here.

There are a few ways to be greedy with this opening:

Delaying the 2nd and 3rd stalker for a tech building: Especially if you really don't think any aggression/pressure will be coming from your opponent, you can delay 2 stalkers(250/100) in favor of any tech building. This allows you to get a tech structure at the same timing as if you were doing a 1 gate build. However, keep in mind that this doesn't allow you to push out as aggressively to either deny pylons, put on pressure, or scout.

Not getting a sentry: Sometimes players will assume no aggression will come from your opponent when doing a 3 stalker opening just because the 3 stalker opening is known for being really solid against aggression. Skipping a sentry is completely viable against all but the most aggressive options and can get you ahead when you're planning on doing blink or dt builds.

As with the 1 gate opening, the 2 gate opening allows an opportunity for some pressure. By pulling off gas, you can actually perform a close to standard 4 gate, something some players won't expect. Other less extreme options include either a 5 or 7 stalker poke.

Spoiler The 2 gate opening, commonly known as the 3 stalker opening, is the other common opener in PvP. It relies on the dominance in the early game of your initial 3 stalkers to deny the initial proxy pylon on the map. One version of a standard defensive 2 gate/3 stalker opening can be found here. There are a few ways to be greedy with this opening: As with the 1 gate opening, the 2 gate opening allows an opportunity for some pressure. By pulling off gas, you can actually perform a close to standard 4 gate, something some players won't expect. Other less extreme options include either a 5 or 7 stalker poke.

Mid Game: Picking Your Tech:

After the initial openings, there exists a period of time where both players pick their tech, usually somewhat independent of one another, and clash them in unique interactions based on the type of tech(s) by either player, the timing of their techs(usually based on how greedy each player was), and the mindset of each player. Because this guide is meant to mostly educate observers and not players, I won't go too deep into each option. For a more visual and slightly more comprehensive guide on how builds interact, check



The following 4 mid-game techs are what I consider to be the "safer" or more well rounded builds.

Blink Robo: Also known as robo twilight or blink obs, for the past year, blink robo has been the "standard" of PvP. It isn't autoloss versus anything, doing quite well straight up vs blink, dt, and phoenix builds. It can also threaten base trades vs straight all-in colossi builds. The only thing it struggles with are fast expand builds on certain maps. While on maps like antiga and cloud kingdom, you have a lot of room to harass if your opponent takes an expo, on a map like daybreak where an expanding protoss can defend both his natural and blink paths to his main at the same time, you will be very behind.



Here is a very old thread I wrote on the blink obs style. Keep in mind that it is very outdated back in a time when 4 gate was very deadly, blink all-ins were way more common, immortals were weaker, maps were very different, and the metagame was completely different. One big change, for example, is that modern blink obs style gets the twilight much faster, either before the robo or directly after the robo, because it's much safer to do so these days.





Also known as robo twilight or blink obs, for the past year, blink robo has been the "standard" of PvP. It isn't autoloss versus anything, doing quite well straight up vs blink, dt, and phoenix builds. It can also threaten base trades vs straight all-in colossi builds. The only thing it struggles with are fast expand builds on certain maps. While on maps like antiga and cloud kingdom, you have a lot of room to harass if your opponent takes an expo, on a map like daybreak where an expanding protoss can defend both his natural and blink paths to his main at the same time, you will be very behind. Here is a very old thread I wrote on the blink obs style. Keep in mind that it is very outdated back in a time when 4 gate was very deadly, blink all-ins were way more common, immortals were weaker, maps were very different, and the metagame was completely different. One big change, for example, is that modern blink obs style gets the twilight much faster, either before the robo or directly after the robo, because it's much safer to do so these days. Phoenix: Phoenix is a somewhat new and developing style. It is possible to combine it with a robotics to play an extremely safe version of it. Phoenixes rely on easy harass and the inability of protoss units to easily deal with them. Phoenixes themselves, especially in the late game, are terrible fighting units. Here is a guide for further information on phoenix play.





Phoenix is a somewhat new and developing style. It is possible to combine it with a robotics to play an extremely safe version of it. Phoenixes rely on easy harass and the inability of protoss units to easily deal with them. Phoenixes themselves, especially in the late game, are terrible fighting units. Here is a guide for further information on phoenix play. Robo: Robo into reaction is a viable, abet not very aggressive style of play. Many times, it's hard to tell a player is actually going for this style, because it deviates into either robo blink or colossi play.

Speed Prism Immortals: Contrary to popular belief, Speed Prism Immortals is NOT a build. It is a reaction to your opponent's robo only play. That is, you scout your opponent only has a robo and no twilight/stargate. In most cases, this only happens when both players are going colossi. Another thing to note is that if both players are going colossi, both players should also be going speed prism immortals.



Robo into reaction is a viable, abet not very aggressive style of play. Many times, it's hard to tell a player is actually going for this style, because it deviates into either robo blink or colossi play. 2 Gate Expand: There actually exists a relatively all around safe expansion build on some maps. It has been used multiple times by Oz, Parting, and Huk. The only things it will die to are warp prism 4 gates and dedicated phoenix all-ins, so it's basically the safest expansion build that exists. I might write something short on this eventually.

The following are a bit more coin-flippy: (high risk, high reward)

Other Expansion Builds: Other expands are usually not as solid as the standard 2 gate expand or they come after aggression, such as the 3 gate aggression. Super greedy expansion builds rely on your opponent not going for any aggression including the rather common 3 gate aggression and are thus rather gimmicky.





Other expands are usually not as solid as the standard 2 gate expand or they come after aggression, such as the 3 gate aggression. Super greedy expansion builds rely on your opponent not going for any aggression including the rather common 3 gate aggression and are thus rather gimmicky. Blind Colossi: Versus phoenix or some types of early expansions on big maps, this build is auto-loss. However, it does quite well versus everything else.





Versus phoenix or some types of early expansions on big maps, this build is auto-loss. However, it does quite well versus everything else. Blink Stalker: Most blink stalker builds without a robo are a result of the blink stalker player getting an extremely fast blink and then reacting by not getting a robo, usually because his opponent is either also going for mass blink stalker or doing a phoenix or expansion build. The tradeoff is that you can cut corners versus those builds but aren't safe versus dts.





Most blink stalker builds without a robo are a result of the blink stalker player getting an extremely fast blink and then reacting by not getting a robo, usually because his opponent is either also going for mass blink stalker or doing a phoenix or expansion build. The tradeoff is that you can cut corners versus those builds but aren't safe versus dts. Dt Expand: Dts can be used to transition into a macro build. However, this is a bit gimicky as it heavily relies on how much damage your initial dts can do. A guide of this can be found here.





Dts can be used to transition into a macro build. However, this is a bit gimicky as it heavily relies on how much damage your initial dts can do. A guide of this can be found here. All-ins: The common early mid game aggressions you have to worry about include 4 gate warp prism all-in, phenoix gateway all-in, dt into bust the ramp aggression, and ~7 minute blink stalker aggression. The common late mid game aggressions include 1 base colossi and blink stalker all-ins, usually both versus expansion play.

End Game: Colossi Wars:

Colossi wars in end game PvP are unavoidable and almost every extremely long macro game ends up in a mass colossi war with supporting units. The following is a chronological summary of how a standard 2+ base macro PvP should go:

Double Robo Colossi: Eventually, both players will eventually transition into double robo for mass colossi production. Double robo gives you the ability to produce as many colossi as possible off of 2 base. Although you don't want double robo initially if your opponent isn't going colossi, because you'll get all-in'd too easily, eventually both players will always want to head for double robo in a long macro game.



Eventually, both players will eventually transition into double robo for mass colossi production. Double robo gives you the ability to produce as many colossi as possible off of 2 base. Although you don't want double robo initially if your opponent isn't going colossi, because you'll get all-in'd too easily, eventually both players will always want to head for double robo in a long macro game. Forges: Once it's confirmed that both players are going into the macro game or once you feel safe from all-ins, throw up a forge to go into the macro game. There is a lot of debate as to whether 1 forge or 2 forges are better at this stage. Hasuobs is a player who has always gone for 2 and 2 is beginning to become more and more popular, but as of now, 1 is still the standard. One argument as to why 2 forges isn't as useful is that in the end stages of the game where colossi are doing 90% of the dps, +1, +2, and +3 armor together are worth the same as +1 attack.



Once it's confirmed that both players are going into the macro game or once you feel safe from all-ins, throw up a forge to go into the macro game. There is a lot of debate as to whether 1 forge or 2 forges are better at this stage. Hasuobs is a player who has always gone for 2 and 2 is beginning to become more and more popular, but as of now, 1 is still the standard. One argument as to why 2 forges isn't as useful is that in the end stages of the game where colossi are doing 90% of the dps, +1, +2, and +3 armor together are worth the same as +1 attack. Archon stage: Archons and chargelots are needed eventually to act as the buffer between yourself and your opponents' colossi. Archons are usually added on about the time you take your third in a standard macro game. An archon/gateway buff is necessary, because if you try to max out on solely colossi, you'll end up dying with 180 supply of pure colossi to 200 supply of colossi + gateway/archon.



Archons and chargelots are needed eventually to act as the buffer between yourself and your opponents' colossi. Archons are usually added on about the time you take your third in a standard macro game. An archon/gateway buff is necessary, because if you try to max out on solely colossi, you'll end up dying with 180 supply of pure colossi to 200 supply of colossi + gateway/archon. Mothership stage: Motherships are the current endgame of PvP, only gotten on 3+ bases after both players are maxed. If you vortex your opponent's army, he will have to put everything in, because he can't fight with half his army. And if he puts everything in the vortex, you'll be able to form an effective concave around his army that essentially wins the game for you given the armies are at least somewhat equal. The reason motherships aren't gotten earlier is 2 fold. It's a huge investment and your opponent can kill you with gateway/archon/colossi if you try to get them too fast. Also, one single templar with feedback can negate the whole purpose of the mothership.

Who wins a fight?

In colossi wars, there are 4 main things that determine who wins a fight. The 3 main ones include concave/positioning, number of colossi, and upgrades, while the fringe one is number of buffer units.

Concave/Positioning : As the colossi numbers grow and grow,concave matters more and more. A defensive position held by a protoss can be impossible to break in the end game, so the only recourse is to attack another position and force your opponent to come to you. Another consequence of this is that if your opponent gets in a defensive position at one of your bases, that base is dead.



: As the colossi numbers grow and grow,concave matters more and more. A defensive position held by a protoss can be impossible to break in the end game, so the only recourse is to attack another position and force your opponent to come to you. Another consequence of this is that if your opponent gets in a defensive position at one of your bases, that base is dead. Upgrades : Attack upgrades are king. The +1 upgrade for colossi makes colossi take 1 less shot to kill every protoss ground unit (except probes, sentries, and templar which aren't used in combat anyways). The +2 upgrade for colossi lets colossi kill immortals, archons, and other colossi faster. Finally, the +3 upgrade lets colossi take 1 less shot against every unit.*source



: Attack upgrades are king. The +1 upgrade for colossi makes colossi take 1 less shot to kill every protoss ground unit (except probes, sentries, and templar which aren't used in combat anyways). The +2 upgrade for colossi lets colossi kill immortals, archons, and other colossi faster. Finally, the +3 upgrade lets colossi take 1 less shot against every unit.*source Number of Colossi : Pretty simple. More colossi > less colossi



: Pretty simple. More colossi > less colossi Number of Buffer Units: As the colossi numbers grow, small differences in buffer units end up not mattering as much as long as there are buffer units. Buffer units on different levels or lines of battle are even better to diversify colossi fire. For example, Zealot fight at melee range, archons fight at range 3 and don't take much from splash, and immortals fight at 6 range.

Out of Game: Playstyles:

Besides knowing about the game, it's important to know the styles of each of the players so you can have an expectation of what these players will do. Thus, your expectation can either be met or broken. Korean PvP is more focused on mechanics and winning with those mechanics/micro abilities. This is why Korean PvP is so 1 base/all-in focused and 4 gate dominated so much in the Korean metagame for so long. Foreigners, on the other hand, rely on more macro based defensive play and generally do better in long term games. This is why in both the IEM championships and the MLG Arena, you had so many long 2+ base PvP's. MC even said during IEM that he learned a lot about PvP from the Europeans. As a sidenote, I found it interesting that in MLG Arena, the longest PvPs occured between the only 2 NA players, Ddoro and Minigun.



Threads for Further Reading:

by Alejandrisha

by CecilSunkure

by NrGmonk

by NrGmonk

by Geiko

by CecilSunkure

SC2 Strategy Recommended Threads Out of all the matchups in Starcraft, PvP is often labeled as the most boring matchups to spectate. I speculate that this is largely because people don’t understand it; they see short games where random units from opposing sides slam into each other and don’t grasp why one player won over the other. The following is meant to educate players, spectators, and even casters on how PvP works and hopefully up the enjoyment factor for everyone. This is how a normal PvP should go:A few scout timings are popular in modern PvP:If you learn the hints that a 4 gate is coming, you can get in the mindsets of the players themselves when they're scouting. How afraid are they of being 4 gated? How greedy are they playing with regards to the perceived possibility of aggression?90% of openings boil down to either a standard 1 gate opening or a standard 2 gate opening.After the initial openings, there exists a period of time where both players pick their tech, usually somewhat independent of one another, and clash them in unique interactions based on the type of tech(s) by either player, the timing of their techs(usually based on how greedy each player was), and the mindset of each player. Because this guide is meant to mostly educate observers and not players, I won't go too deep into each option. For a more visual and slightly more comprehensive guide on how builds interact, check this thread . For more information on each individual style, check the guides that go along with each particular style.The following 4 mid-game techs are what I consider to be the "safer" or more well rounded builds.The following are a bit more coin-flippy: (high risk, high reward)Colossi wars in end game PvP are unavoidable and almost every extremely long macro game ends up in a mass colossi war with supporting units. The following is a chronological summary of how a standard 2+ base macro PvP should go:In colossi wars, there are 4 main things that determine who wins a fight. The 3 main ones include concave/positioning, number of colossi, and upgrades, while the fringe one is number of buffer units.Besides knowing about the game, it's important to know the styles of each of the players so you can have an expectation of what these players will do. Thus, your expectation can either be met or broken. Korean PvP is more focused on mechanics and winning with those mechanics/micro abilities. This is why Korean PvP is so 1 base/all-in focused and 4 gate dominated so much in the Korean metagame for so long. Foreigners, on the other hand, rely on more macro based defensive play and generally do better in long term games. This is why in both the IEM championships and the MLG Arena, you had so many long 2+ base PvP's. MC even said during IEM that he learned a lot about PvP from the Europeans. As a sidenote, I found it interesting that in MLG Arena, the longest PvPs occured between the only 2 NA players, Ddoro and Minigun. 1 Gate Openings by Alejandrisha 2 Gate Openings by CecilSunkure Comparison of PvP Midgames by NrGmonk Blink Obs Midgame by NrGmonk Pheonix Midgame by Geiko DT FE Midgame by CecilSunkure Moderator

monk Profile Blog Joined May 2009 United States 8468 Posts Last Edited: 2012-04-14 11:53:43 #2 Example: MC vs Genius Quarterfinals of GSL Seasons 1

This was a very interesting PvP series that I felt demonstrated a lot of the concepts I wrote about in this guide. The games can be found



Game 1 on Dual Sight:

MC opens a standard 2 gate opening while trying to block Genius' 2nd gas. Genius opens what looks like a standard 1 gate opening, but in fact it is a fake into a 4 gate with a gas cancel. MC sees that Genius got a 2nd gas even though he didn't see it even finish. Seeing a 2nd gas is only a slight hint that no 4 gate is coming; it does not 100% rule out 4 gate. MC, being the risk seeking guy he is, does indeed rule it out. Thus, when Genius pressure with his 1 zealot and 2 stalkers, MC warps in 2 additional stalkers instead of 2 sentries or at least one sentry. His reasoning is that because Genius got a 2nd gas, the most aggressive build he can do is a 3 gate pressure; the maximum amount of units off a 3 gate pressure at that timing is 1 zealot and 5 stalkers. Thus, because MC did a lot of damage to one of Genius' stalkers in the early game and he would have the high ground advantage in a fight, MC figured that with a warpin of 2 additional stalkers for a total of 5 stalkers, he would be able to repel Genius' aggression no matter what. 5 stalkers would also allow him to punish Genius' pressure if it were not extremely dedicated while 4 stalkers and 1 sentry wouldn't be able to chase Genius' units down as effectively. Another big reason for the stalker warpin is that MC had already dedicated to robo twilight tech in which case any units that aren't stalkers are a liability. Unfortunately for him, Genius has gone for 4 gate, the only build where MC's decision to warpin 2 additional stalkers is a mistake; he proceeds to lose as 1 zealot and 6 stalkers push up his ramp versus only 5 stalkers.



This was a very interesting PvP series that I felt demonstrated a lot of the concepts I wrote about in this guide. The games can be found here , although you need a pass to watch all but the first game.MC opens a standard 2 gate opening while trying to block Genius' 2nd gas. Genius opens what looks like a standard 1 gate opening, but in fact it is a fake into a 4 gate with a gas cancel. MC sees that Genius got a 2nd gas even though he didn't see it even finish. Seeing a 2nd gas is only a slight hint that no 4 gate is coming; it does not 100% rule out 4 gate. MC, being the risk seeking guy he is, does indeed rule it out. Thus, when Genius pressure with his 1 zealot and 2 stalkers, MC warps in 2 additional stalkers instead of 2 sentries or at least one sentry. His reasoning is that because Genius got a 2nd gas, the most aggressive build he can do is a 3 gate pressure; the maximum amount of units off a 3 gate pressure at that timing is 1 zealot and 5 stalkers. Thus, because MC did a lot of damage to one of Genius' stalkers in the early game and he would have the high ground advantage in a fight, MC figured that with a warpin of 2 additional stalkers for a total of 5 stalkers, he would be able to repel Genius' aggression no matter what. 5 stalkers would also allow him to punish Genius' pressure if it were not extremely dedicated while 4 stalkers and 1 sentry wouldn't be able to chase Genius' units down as effectively. Another big reason for the stalker warpin is that MC had already dedicated to robo twilight tech in which case any units that aren't stalkers are a liability. Unfortunately for him, Genius has gone for 4 gate, the only build where MC's decision to warpin 2 additional stalkers is a mistake; he proceeds to lose as 1 zealot and 6 stalkers push up his ramp versus only 5 stalkers. The decision that loses MC the game.



From the winner's interview:

Q: Your strategies worked right from the start. Your 4-gate in the first game was successful.

A: I originally wanted to play a more standard game. MC kept blocking my gas though, and that made me think he didn't want to play a standard game with me. As a result, I just improvised and used a 4-gate.



Game 2 Cloud Kingdom:

Game 2 demonstrates a very standard back and forth macro game between robo twilight mirror. It is known as the first 3 base macro PvP in the GSL; this occurred in its 13th season.



Both players open a standard 1 gate opening except MC opts not to get a gas. This tells Genius that MC will either 4 gate, go for a 3 gate pressure, take an early expand, or is just trying to trick Genius and make him play more passively. In response, Genius opts to go for a 2 gate tech opening to play more safely instead of a 1 gate tech opening like I'm sure he originally planned.



MC opts for the 3 gate pressure option and pushes up with Genius' ramp with 1 zealot and 6 stalkers. A few things happen immediately. First, Genius sees the 1 zealot and 6 stalkers at this weird timing and might get confused. A standard 3 gate pressure hits earlier with 1 zealot and 5 stalkers, yet he sees the presence of an additional stalker. What MC did was delay his warpgates and 2nd and 3rd gateway in favor of a faster 2nd stalker. This allows him to get the same amount of units as a 4 gate but push 10 seconds later. Genius might think that MC just made his proxy pylon too far thus causing the delay and he was indeed being 4 gated based on the number of units; in this scenario he might overreact.



The 2nd thing that happens is that both sides show each other what they have at the moment.



From the winner's interview:Q: Your strategies worked right from the start. Your 4-gate in the first game was successful.A: I originally wanted to play a more standard game. MC kept blocking my gas though, and that made me think he didn't want to play a standard game with me. As a result, I just improvised and used a 4-gate.Game 2 demonstrates a very standard back and forth macro game between robo twilight mirror. It is known as the first 3 base macro PvP in the GSL; this occurred in its 13th season.Both players open a standard 1 gate opening except MC opts not to get a gas. This tells Genius that MC will either 4 gate, go for a 3 gate pressure, take an early expand, or is just trying to trick Genius and make him play more passively. In response, Genius opts to go for a 2 gate tech opening to play more safely instead of a 1 gate tech opening like I'm sure he originally planned.MC opts for the 3 gate pressure option and pushes up with Genius' ramp with 1 zealot and 6 stalkers. A few things happen immediately. First, Genius sees the 1 zealot and 6 stalkers at this weird timing and might get confused. A standard 3 gate pressure hits earlier with 1 zealot and 5 stalkers, yet he sees the presence of an additional stalker. What MC did was delay his warpgates and 2nd and 3rd gateway in favor of a faster 2nd stalker. This allows him to get the same amount of units as a 4 gate but push 10 seconds later. Genius might think that MC just made his proxy pylon too far thus causing the delay and he was indeed being 4 gated based on the number of units; in this scenario he might overreact.The 2nd thing that happens is that both sides show each other what they have at the moment. MC's point of view: MC sees that Genius has 2 stalkers, 1 sentry, and 2 sentries that are warping in; he also sees a very late robo being built. Believe it or not, if MC is astute, he can then deduce that Genius is going for a robo twilight build. From the 2 warping in sentries plus the original zealot/stalker/stalker/sentry combo that is standard off of 1 gate, MC might be able to conclude that Genius only has 2 gateways. From the timing of the robo in addition to the information that Genius only had 2 gates, he can conclude Genius went 2 gate tech and that there is another tech building in Genius' base; the only one that makes sense is a twilight council. The only other possible likely building configuration for Genius is that he got 3 gates, just didn't use all 3 of his gates to warp in, and got an extremely late tech building(the robo).



MC's response is to expand off of 3 gates and then go into 5 gate blink, a perfect counter to robo twilight; he will be able to defend any 1 base all-ins easily. Even if Genius were going for plain robo/colossi play, MC would be able to base trade with his superior economy vs extremely late colossi and win. MC knows he does not need a robo, because he though he might suspect Genius has a twilight, Genius had just warpined in 2 sentry plus invested an additional 100 gas into a robo. Genius would have to be extremely tricky to go for a dark shrine after that.





This picture is worth a lot of words.



Genius' point of view: Genius sees that MC has 6 stalkers. He now knows that MC did either a 3 gate or 4 gate pressure. The only possible followups from this are a combination of 1 or 2 of the following: blink, robo, or expand. For example, MC could go pure blink, blink with expand, or blink with robo. As I mentioned before, dts, phoenix, and even colossi aren't really viable because of the late gas and the investment into making all those stalkers for pressure. Genius as a result cancels his robo, because he won't be too much worse versus any of MC's options without a robo and he'll be better off versus anything involving an expansion.



At 8 minutes, Genius spots MC's stalkers in a line in front of his expansion and can thus assume that MC has an expansion. He immediately takes his expansion and postures in front of MC's base. A funny thing happens in PvP when one player has an expansion and the other doesn't. The player with an expansion has to be worried about all-ins, so he has to cut probes between 30 and 35. If the other player acts aggressive and pretends to all-in while expanding and making probes behind it, he can actually catch up in economy with the 2 basing player. It's up to the original 2 basing player to either scout the expo or make a read on whether his opponent will actually all-in.



In this particular game, MC decides to cut probes at exactly 30 to both most effectively hold all-ins and do a semi all-in counter attack if his opponent expanded. He tries it but fails to take into account a few things:

Genius' sentries that he made in the early game have almost each accumulated almost 200 energy, allowing him to delay for much longer than MC had expected.



As soon as Genius saw the mass stalkers from MC, he threw up a robo as he knew he needed a tech advantage to defend MC's attack as MC would have the numbers advantage with his 2nd base mining for a longer time.



MC went the wrong way, wasting too much time trying to bust the ramp instead of attacking from the side.



MC underestimated the defensive concave advantage Genius would have on Cloud Kingdom.

Genius gets 2 immortals up and it no longer becomes possible to break him. Thus, MC goes back to making probes and adding a robo plus additional gas. As soon as MC backs off and relieves the pressure, Genius adds 2 gas, a forge, and a robo bay, preparing for the late game. MC also adds all his gas and a robo bay, but opts to delay his forge until later. MC is the first to add a 2nd robo followed by a forge; Genius adds his 2nd robo shortly after, which turns this game into a standard 2 base/2 robo/1 forge macro game.



The differences between the 2 armies is very minimal. One important thing to note is that Genius 4 more immortals and 6 fewer stalkers compared to MC. This gives MC map control, allowing him to pick off pylons and kill rocks freely while spreading his own pylons. On the other hand, in a big fight, this will give Genius a small advantage.



With his advantage, Genius takes his 3rd at 17 minutes while MC takes his at 18 minutes. Genius begins adding cannons in his minerals lines as a precaution versus possible dts. Genius fights a bad battle and ends up 30 supply behind, but he still holds the upgrade and unit composition advantage. MC goes for the killing blow, with 30 supply up. However, his unit supply advantage of 30 supply up and colossi number advantage of 8 to 7 isn't able to overcome Genius' unit composition advantage of more immortals vs more stalkers, his upgrade advantage of +2 vs +1, and his army resupply advantage(MC had no proxy pylon to reinforce. As with most late game PvPs, the game is decided with one fight and Genius stomps MC with his resulting higher colossi count and archon reinforcements.



Game 3 Entombed Valley:

MC opts for a 1 gate stargate opening while Genius goes for another fake gas into 4 gate opening. This game is a good demonstration of how a 1 gate opening can hold a 4 gate with perfect control. MC ends up way ahead, killing 3 zealots and 3 stalkers while only losing a plyon and a stalker.



MC then decides to save up phoenix and add a gateway to go for a phoenix 4 gate all-in. I can see his reasoning in that one of Genius' best options in that scenario was to go for an expansion build and hope that MC also went for an expansion or robo followup so that he couldn't punish it. However, it was a game losing decision as Genius has 2 sentries ready to block his ramp(because he scouted the phoenix with a scouting zealot) and later rolls MC over with a colossi plus a bunch of other random units.



Now, any decently high level protoss player can tell you that phoenix versus robo, especially a robo player who makes 2 immortals then a colossi, puts you in a very favorable position. The strength of phoenix vs robo does not lie in direct fighting power of the phoenix vs robo units; rather, phoenix can harass the robo player's mineral line without fear of retaliation from robo units. If the robo player decides to all-in, the phoenix player should be able to defend with just the sheer number of units he has with a normal economy versus a damaged economy. Because MC chose not to do any economic damage, this concept didn't apply in this game and Genius was able to win.



If MC had instead chosen to begin harassing/scouting with 2-3 phoenix, he would be able to kill probes, perhaps a sentry, and scout whether his all-in would succeed or not. If Genius had expanded, MC could have still all-in'd successfully vs an expansion build given how far ahead he was. Even in the worst case scenario where Genius followed up with a blink stalker opening, Genius' blink would have been delayed because of his 4 gate and MC could have still gone into the macro game with a huge lead. Personally, I believe MC committed to the phoenix 4 gate all-in, because all-ins are just simply his style or he specifically prepared this all-in on a map where expansion plays are popular and just stuck to it, not willing to adapt to the circumstances.



MC's movements with his phoenix also lead me to believe that he is inexperienced with them. In fact, this is his first and only game I've ever seen where he has gone phoenix in a PvP. He was never in a good position to harass probes or keep track of Genius' army; he just seemed confused after his attempt at an all-in failed. He even was caught with all his phoenix in the middle of the map as Genius walked up his ramp and killed him. In fact, I believe MC could have defended Genius' attack if the phoenix were there by targeting the Colossi with both the immortal and the phoenix as it was trying to stomp on the forcefields. Then, when the colossi died, MC could forcefield again, cutting Genius' army in half.



Anyways, Genius 3-0 MC At 8 minutes, Genius spots MC's stalkers in a line in front of his expansion and can thus assume that MC has an expansion. He immediately takes his expansion and postures in front of MC's base. A funny thing happens in PvP when one player has an expansion and the other doesn't. The player with an expansion has to be worried about all-ins, so he has to cut probes between 30 and 35. If the other player acts aggressive and pretends to all-in while expanding and making probes behind it, he can actually catch up in economy with the 2 basing player. It's up to the original 2 basing player to either scout the expo or make a read on whether his opponent will actually all-in.In this particular game, MC decides to cut probes at exactly 30 to both most effectively hold all-ins and do a semi all-in counter attack if his opponent expanded. He tries it but fails to take into account a few things:Genius gets 2 immortals up and it no longer becomes possible to break him. Thus, MC goes back to making probes and adding a robo plus additional gas. As soon as MC backs off and relieves the pressure, Genius adds 2 gas, a forge, and a robo bay, preparing for the late game. MC also adds all his gas and a robo bay, but opts to delay his forge until later. MC is the first to add a 2nd robo followed by a forge; Genius adds his 2nd robo shortly after, which turns this game into a standard 2 base/2 robo/1 forge macro game.The differences between the 2 armies is very minimal. One important thing to note is that Genius 4 more immortals and 6 fewer stalkers compared to MC. This gives MC map control, allowing him to pick off pylons and kill rocks freely while spreading his own pylons. On the other hand, in a big fight, this will give Genius a small advantage.With his advantage, Genius takes his 3rd at 17 minutes while MC takes his at 18 minutes. Genius begins adding cannons in his minerals lines as a precaution versus possible dts. Genius fights a bad battle and ends up 30 supply behind, but he still holds the upgrade and unit composition advantage. MC goes for the killing blow, with 30 supply up. However, his unit supply advantage of 30 supply up and colossi number advantage of 8 to 7 isn't able to overcome Genius' unit composition advantage of more immortals vs more stalkers, his upgrade advantage of +2 vs +1, and his army resupply advantage(MC had no proxy pylon to reinforce. As with most late game PvPs, the game is decided with one fight and Genius stomps MC with his resulting higher colossi count and archon reinforcements.MC opts for a 1 gate stargate opening while Genius goes for another fake gas into 4 gate opening. This game is a good demonstration of how a 1 gate opening can hold a 4 gate with perfect control. MC ends up way ahead, killing 3 zealots and 3 stalkers while only losing a plyon and a stalker.MC then decides to save up phoenix and add a gateway to go for a phoenix 4 gate all-in. I can see his reasoning in that one of Genius' best options in that scenario was to go for an expansion build and hope that MC also went for an expansion or robo followup so that he couldn't punish it. However, it was a game losing decision as Genius has 2 sentries ready to block his ramp(because he scouted the phoenix with a scouting zealot) and later rolls MC over with a colossi plus a bunch of other random units.Now, any decently high level protoss player can tell you that phoenix versus robo, especially a robo player who makes 2 immortals then a colossi, puts you in a very favorable position. The strength of phoenix vs robo does not lie in direct fighting power of the phoenix vs robo units; rather, phoenix can harass the robo player's mineral line without fear of retaliation from robo units. If the robo player decides to all-in, the phoenix player should be able to defend with just the sheer number of units he has with a normal economy versus a damaged economy. Because MC chose not to do any economic damage, this concept didn't apply in this game and Genius was able to win.If MC had instead chosen to begin harassing/scouting with 2-3 phoenix, he would be able to kill probes, perhaps a sentry, and scout whether his all-in would succeed or not. If Genius had expanded, MC could have still all-in'd successfully vs an expansion build given how far ahead he was. Even in the worst case scenario where Genius followed up with a blink stalker opening, Genius' blink would have been delayed because of his 4 gate and MC could have still gone into the macro game with a huge lead. Personally, I believe MC committed to the phoenix 4 gate all-in, because all-ins are just simply his style or he specifically prepared this all-in on a map where expansion plays are popular and just stuck to it, not willing to adapt to the circumstances.MC's movements with his phoenix also lead me to believe that he is inexperienced with them. In fact, this is his first and only game I've ever seen where he has gone phoenix in a PvP. He was never in a good position to harass probes or keep track of Genius' army; he just seemed confused after his attempt at an all-in failed. He even was caught with all his phoenix in the middle of the map as Genius walked up his ramp and killed him. In fact, I believe MC could have defended Genius' attack if the phoenix were there by targeting the Colossi with both the immortal and the phoenix as it was trying to stomp on the forcefields. Then, when the colossi died, MC could forcefield again, cutting Genius' army in half.Anyways, Genius 3-0 MC Moderator

CecilSunkure Profile Blog Joined May 2010 United States 2829 Posts #3 Jesus kevin. You must have really hurt that finger!



Going to read when I get a chance. Just wanted to say that this looks very impressive and long. Appreciate it!

MateShade Profile Joined July 2011 Australia 736 Posts #4 Great guide, I'm getting a bit tired of trying to explain to people how PvP isn't a coinflip matchup in the slightest

Teoita Profile Blog Joined January 2011 Italy 11913 Posts #5 Monk, have my babies.



Actually all you blues, have my babies. Thank you so much! Moderator Protoss all-ins are like a wok. You can throw whatever you want in there and it will turn out alright.

TangSC Profile Blog Joined July 2011 Canada 1852 Posts #6 So helpful, I die to so many different builds when I play PvP. This is a great overview of the options available, as well as how to properly execute/engage. I particularly enjoyed the analysis of Genius vs MC, well done! Coaching www.allin-academy.com | Team www.All-Inspiration.com

SolidSMD Profile Joined April 2011 Belgium 408 Posts #7 Wow, nice write-up. I support this idea a lot, because it's so annoying to listen to casters during a PvP, they're just so clueless, only exceptions are wolf and artosis that have something meaningfull to say about it.

Cheers man, interesting read, very informative! Working on Starbow!

gsbElfenLied Profile Joined January 2011 Sweden 45 Posts #8 Man, i love blueposts every day of the week If i type something interesting here, will you respect my opinion more?

p2jh Profile Joined October 2011 France 24 Posts Last Edited: 2012-04-14 15:13:46 #9 That's an incredible amount of information you put together, I didn't know what I was doing tonight anyway, going to study this !



Thank you very much ! :D



Edit : could'nt wait, read it all, such an intersting read. Wonder if we should tweet that to some casters, so they can use it while doing their job, because I'm sure they don't know all, and if they do, they definitly should enlight their knowledge and not just say random things.

AGIANTSMURF Profile Blog Joined September 2010 United States 1230 Posts #10 Sick guide yo, i been having pvp trouble for the longest..... Thats "Grand-Master" SMURF to you.....

Markwerf Profile Joined March 2010 Netherlands 3723 Posts #11 Decent overview despite disagreeing with a few points here and there.

For example noting that both players need to go speed prism immortals if it's colossi vs colossi is a very bold statement. Warp prism is still quite expensive and fragile.

I think it's also very important to note that at some maps blink obs is practically an unbeatable strat. Maps like shakuras and antiga for example the angles between nat and main are so good for blink obs that I don't think any strat can compete with it. Blink obs is only really countered by a FE or robo into FE on many maps and if the cliffs are good enough those are even behind vs blink obs too.

BronzeKnee Profile Joined March 2011 United States 5112 Posts Last Edited: 2012-04-14 18:43:22 #12 Awesome guide man. Can you please change the color of MC text from red into like a dark red or green or something? It is difficult to read.

Cloudshade Profile Joined October 2010 91 Posts #13 Dude lol this is so well written bro XD I kinda knew pretty much everything you said but I couldn't stop reading because it was so well written XD great job dude =]

Whatson Profile Blog Joined January 2012 United States 5302 Posts #14 You have such high-level guides ¯\_(シ)_/¯

Arcanefrost Profile Blog Joined August 2010 Belgium 1256 Posts #15 Nice read. Valor is a poor substitute for numbers.

StarGalaxy Profile Joined March 2011 Germany 743 Posts Last Edited: 2012-04-14 19:42:19 #16 Thx for the article. That was very interesting.



Hope to see the same about PvT. =) Cj hero | Zest

TheMooseHeed Profile Joined July 2010 United Kingdom 531 Posts #17 Wow I play zerg but man this was interesting. I had no idea the amount of tactics went into pvp. Split second reads, fakes, and of course some coinflips. Very nice ''Swarm hosts are the worst thing in the world, I mean terrorism is pretty bad but swarmhosts are worse'' IdrA on ZvZ

Geiko Profile Blog Joined June 2010 France 1924 Posts #18 The following is meant to educate players, spectators, and even casters on how PvP works



Especially casters. Every time I watch a casted PvP with friends, I have to do the commentating because this is the match-up that casters understand the least. It's too bad for them because it's actually a match-up where you can look like a total bawss, predicting things with great accuracy. Sadly, the only thing that casters seem to know about PvP is that you need sentries to defend a 4 gate, that players usually go blink robo afterwards and that colossi are good lategame.



Great guide monk, really liked your MC vs Genius analysis. Third game was easy win for MC if he didn't have his phoenix in the middle of the map T.T. I was literally screaming behind my computer "PULL THOSE F$*^!ing phoenixes back MC !" before the final fight Especially casters. Every time I watch a casted PvP with friends, I have to do the commentating because this is the match-up that casters understand the least. It's too bad for them because it's actually a match-up where you can look like a total bawss, predicting things with great accuracy. Sadly, the only thing that casters seem to know about PvP is that you need sentries to defend a 4 gate, that players usually go blink robo afterwards and that colossi are good lategame.Great guide monk, really liked your MC vs Genius analysis. Third game was easy win for MC if he didn't have his phoenix in the middle of the map T.T. I was literally screaming behind my computer "PULL THOSE F$*^!ing phoenixes back MC !" before the final fight geiko.813 (EU)

commiekaze Profile Joined August 2010 Canada 31 Posts #19 Great thread! I am just learning Toss now and threads like this really helps to understand the matchup. It's Best, Bro.

BronzeKnee Profile Joined March 2011 United States 5112 Posts #20 On April 15 2012 04:42 OrbitalPlane wrote:

Thx for the article. That was very interesting.



Hope to see the same about PvT. =)



Me too. I love PvP and understand the matchup well. But my understanding of PvZ and PvT are more limited. Me too. I love PvP and understand the matchup well. But my understanding of PvZ and PvT are more limited.

1 2 3 4 Next All