iamke55 Profile Blog Joined April 2004 United States 2805 Posts Last Edited: 2012-01-11 09:55:28 #1 These games were actually well-planned out by the winner. Let me explain.



I really enjoyed watching today's Code S group. "But there was so much cheese/all-in!" you might say. What others might see as cheesy though, I see as brilliantly planned, strategic play. No, this isn't me using "strategic play" as a euphemism for cheese as someone else once did.Let me explain. Supernova vs MC Game 3

MC didn't get detection and lost to cloaked banshees. Terrible game, Supernova cheesed and got lucky, right? Well, I don't think so. At least, it's not that simple. To understand Supernova's build, consider two key pieces of scouting information he showed MC: MC's scouting probe was blocked by a barracks, 2 supply depot wall. Players savvy in the PvT matchup may know that if you scout the opponent on your first try (which is guaranteed on GSL Antiga Shipyard because of forced cross positions), your probe arrives at the Terran's base when a standard gas opening doesn't have enough minerals to build the second supply depot. So if you see that second depot, you know that Terran didn't build a refinery yet.



He built a bunker on the low ground, on top of the ramp leading to his natural. MC saw this with his zealot/stalker poke, thus "confirming" that Supernova expanded. What build does this look like? Both pieces of information suggest the Terran is going for the most popular, standard macro opening in the current metagame: 1 rax FE with no gas. If I were in MC's position, I would've made the same read. Any Protoss player who didn't find Supernova's smurf and look at his match history would've made the same read.





MC didn't get detection and lost to cloaked banshees. Terrible game, Supernova cheesed and got lucky, right? Well, I don't think so. At least, it's not that simple. To understand Supernova's build, consider two key pieces of scouting information he showed MC:What build does this look like? Both pieces of information suggest the Terran is going for the most popular, standard macro opening in the current metagame: 1 rax FE with no gas. If I were in MC's position, I would've made the same read. Any Protoss player who didn't find Supernova's smurf and look at his match history would've made the same read. How can this not be a no gas fast expand?

Once Supernova gave away these two pieces of information to fake the gasless FE, he correctly predicted MC's response of 1 gate FE into 4 gates with no robo. How did Supernova know this was coming? I believe he made his prediction based on the following logic:

During Homestory Cup 4, this was MC's go to build against Terran's gasless FE. It is how he demolished Poyo and Cloud when they both attempted to play macro games against him. Supernova could've watched HSC4 and learned MC's tendency to play this way, but he probably also knew that MC likes to play this way, being on the same team.



When the Protoss knows Terran is opening with gasless FE and takes his own fast expo, 4 gate pressure is simply a better build than 3 gates with a robo. Gasless FE is usually followed up by either medivac/stim tech(the standard TvP build) or by a fast 3rd CC, neither of which a robo is immediately useful against. A robo with observers kills Protoss' ability to pressure before Terran's stimpack is done researching, and also delays Protoss' 3rd base unnecessarily. At best the 3 gate robo followup comes out even against standard medivac play, and is terrible against fast 3rd CC. 4 gate, on the other hand, puts immense pressure on Terran between 8 and 9 minutes. Terran is especially vulnerable during this period because the standard medivac build has neither stim nor medivacs at this time, and fast 3rd CC delays those even further. This combined with the fact that Terran fears a potential 6 gate all-in means that he must make more bunkers and pull many SCVs off of mining to get ready to repair. Until Terran has stim and medivacs (or ghosts if he went for that route), it is not safe to sell the bunkers and send SCVs back to mining. Once the 9 minute mark is reached and Terran has stim, Protoss simply retreats his units and takes a 3rd base with the resources saved from not getting any tech or upgrades. All in all, the Terran is in a worse position economically than he would be if Protoss didn't pressure.

When all is said and done, sure enough, MC fell for the bait and went for his tried and true 4 gate pressure. Supernova, knowing MC's play style and the fact that the current metagame favors 4 gate against Terran's gasless FE, mindgamed MC by going for cloaked banshees disguised as a gasless FE. With cloak vs no detection, it was an easy win. To win with a cheese against unsafe play is one thing, and happens all the time on ladder. But to win with a cheese after tricking your opponent into thinking he's safe? Now that's something special.



Once Supernova gave away these two pieces of information to fake the gasless FE, he correctly predicted MC's response of 1 gate FE into 4 gates with no robo. How did Supernova know this was coming? I believe he made his prediction based on the following logic:When all is said and done, sure enough, MC fell for the bait and went for his tried and true 4 gate pressure. Supernova, knowing MC's play style and the fact that the current metagame favors 4 gate against Terran's gasless FE, mindgamed MC by going for cloaked banshees disguised as a gasless FE. With cloak vs no detection, it was an easy win. To win with a cheese against unsafe play is one thing, and happens all the time on ladder. But to win with a cheese after tricking your opponent into thinking he's safe? Nowsomething special. ForGG vs MC Game 1

It looks like your average, run of the mill macro game where one side wins after a good engagement. Having just lost to Supernova, MC learned his lesson: no matter what reads you make from scouting, unless you actually see the expansion, Terran can always add gases and switch to cloaked banshees! In this game ForGG showed MC a gasless opening, but not the CC itself. MC, having learned from his mistake the previous game, went for 3 gate robo instead of 4 gate to follow his 1 gate FE, just in case ForGG would pull the same trick Supernova did. ForGG's build? Fast 3rd CC before gas. If gasless FE into medivacs is the soft counter to 1 gate FE into 3 gate robo, then gasless 3rd CC is the hard counter. ForGG took such a big lead just from the choices of build orders that he lost 2 full medivacs for nothing, and still rolled over MC with his massive supply advantage. Did ForGG intentionally manipulate MC into going 3 gate robo, knowing how 4 gate turned out against Supernova? Maybe. Maybe not. But I'd give a former





It looks like your average, run of the mill macro game where one side wins after a good engagement. Having just lost to Supernova, MC learned his lesson:In this game ForGG showed MC a gasless opening, but not the CC itself. MC, having learned from his mistake the previous game, went for 3 gate robo instead of 4 gate to follow his 1 gate FE, just in case ForGG would pull the same trick Supernova did. ForGG's build? Fast 3rd CC before gas. If gasless FE into medivacs is the soft counter to 1 gate FE into 3 gate robo, then gasless 3rd CC is the hard counter. ForGG took such a big lead just from the choices of build orders that he lost 2 full medivacs for nothing, and still rolled over MC with his massive supply advantage. Did ForGG intentionally manipulate MC into going 3 gate robo, knowing how 4 gate turned out against Supernova? Maybe. Maybe not. But I'd give a former MSL champion the benefit of the doubt. Game timer 13:30. This is what happens when you try to play robo vs fast 3rd CC



MC vs Leenock Game 3

At a first glance, MC's build doesn't make any sense. Why do a 7 gate all-in with 12 sentries at the last second, when you could make 8 sentries much earlier and still have just as many force fields? In fact, why do such an outdated build as 7 gate anyway? I believe MC's success resulted from a clever trick taking advantage of how unpopular 7 gate is nowadays. Consider the following 3 builds that are similar to each other, all popular in the current metagame: 4 gate +1 zealot pressure. This build exploits the trend of Zergs expanding twice without gas to skip any sentries or additional cannons beyond the first and sending 8 zealots with +1 weapons to the Zerg's 3rd base at 8 minutes. This pressure hits at an awkward timing for Zerg, forcing them to make many lings and produce roaches earlier than they would like. Meanwhile at home, Protoss has a large gas build-up that eases the transition into either a macro game(see Hero) or a 2 base all-in timing (see Naniwa).



4 gate +1 zealot pressure with void ray support. This is just like the last build, but with 7 zealots and a void ray instead of 8 zealots, at almost the same timing. Upgraded zealots kill spores, queens, and lings while void rays kill roaches, so this build is much more likely to kill the Zerg's 3rd, but worse at transitioning out. Whereas the 8 zealot version punishes late roaches, this one is good against early roaches and punishes late creep spread.



4 gate +1 zealot pressure with DTs. Same idea again, except with DTs instead of void rays. You kill spore crawlers with the zealots and focus down the 3rd with DTs to follow up. What do all of these builds have in common? They all pressure with +1 zealots at 8 minutes, all require Zerg to make roaches to survive, and the latter 2 require Zerg to make spores. Oh, and they're all way more popular, and considered better builds, than the 7 gate. Meanwhile, 7 gate tends to build up a high sentry count early for more force field energy, hit later, and also come with an armor upgrade. Now if you're Leenock and you scout the following with an overlord and a ling at the watchtower, what build do you think MC's doing?





At a first glance, MC's build doesn't make any sense. Why do a 7 gate all-in with 12 sentries at the last second, when you could make 8 sentries much earlier and still have just as many force fields? In fact, why do such an outdated build as 7 gate anyway? I believe MC's success resulted from a clever trick taking advantage of how unpopular 7 gate is nowadays. Consider the following 3 builds that are similar to each other, all popular in the current metagame:What do all of these builds have in common? They all pressure with +1 zealots at 8 minutes, all require Zerg to make roaches to survive, and the latter 2 require Zerg to make spores. Oh, and they're all way more popular, and considered better builds, than the 7 gate. Meanwhile, 7 gate tends to build up a high sentry count early for more force field energy, hit later, and also come with an armor upgrade. Now if you're Leenock and you scout the following with an overlord and a ling at the watchtower, what build do you think MC's doing? 4 gates



+1 zealots



Yeah, that's a no brainer. It's some form of the popular 4 gate +1 zealot pressure, and if Leenock watches a lot of MC's games, he knows the DT variant is MC's favorite one. Especially in foreign tournaments, MC loves the DT followup. Maybe the timing was off, but remember that MC blocked Leenock's hatchery with a pylon, which throws off all timings and I doubt Leenock could've calculated the timing difference on the spot. Also, jetlag and tilt from losing to a baneling bust could have caused MC to mess up his execution. Now consider how Zerg is supposed to play against these builds: Against all 4 gate +1 variations, Zerg must make an early roach warren and start making pure units at around 50-55 drones.

Against the void ray and DT variations, Zerg must make spore crawlers.

Against a 7 gate all-in, Zerg has more time to build drones and wants to have burrow for his roaches. Hydras also help. Guess what Leenock had when the 7 gate hit? 55 drones, a spore crawler, enough roach/ling to hold off 4 gate +1 pressure, and no burrow or hydra den. By building 3 gateways simultaneously in the same area scouted by an overlord, showing only zealots, and delaying sentry warp-ins until the last second, MC fooled Leenock into thinking he was doing his 4 gate +1 zealot pressure into DT build. Leenock prepared for the DT build, but the defense against that is inappropriate for holding off the 7 gate all-in that MC was actually doing. Some of you may have noticed that



Three oGs players today were able to take advantage of trends in the metagame and knowledge of players' past tendencies to disguise their builds, inducing their opponents into sub-optimal responses to their real strategy. These games, despite looking like simple, uninteresting, or even "cheesy" games to the untrained eye, were actually an incredible display of the strategic depth found at the Code S level. If you have read all the way here, I hope you now have a deeper appreciation of these games than you did before.



Yeah, that's a no brainer. It's some form of the popular 4 gate +1 zealot pressure, and if Leenock watches a lot of MC's games, he knows the DT variant is MC's favorite one. Especially in foreign tournaments, MC loves the DT followup. Maybe the timing was off, but remember that MC blocked Leenock's hatchery with a pylon, which throws off all timings and I doubt Leenock could've calculated the timing difference on the spot. Also, jetlag and tilt from losing to a baneling bust could have caused MC to mess up his execution. Now consider how Zerg is supposed to play against these builds:Guess what Leenock had when the 7 gate hit? 55 drones, a spore crawler, enough roach/ling to hold off 4 gate +1 pressure, and no burrow or hydra den. By building 3 gateways simultaneously in the same area scouted by an overlord, showing only zealots, and delaying sentry warp-ins until the last second, MC fooled Leenock into thinking he was doing his 4 gate +1 zealot pressure into DT build. Leenock prepared for the DT build, but the defense against that is inappropriate for holding off the 7 gate all-in that MC was actually doing. Some of you may have noticed that MC did the same trick against Nerchio in HSC4. Once again a player created an illusion in the mind of his opponent, and won the mindgame.Three oGs players today were able to take advantage of trends in the metagame and knowledge of players' past tendencies to disguise their builds, inducing their opponents into sub-optimal responses to their real strategy. These games, despite looking like simple, uninteresting, or even "cheesy" games to the untrained eye, were actually an incredible display of the strategic depth found at the Code S level. If you have read all the way here, I hope you now have a deeper appreciation of these games than you did before. During practice session, I discovered very good build against zerg. -Bisu[Shield]