|
I'm a 2v2 player that has never seen or played any 1v1 games. Are units used in ways in 1v1 that I would never have seen them used before in 2v2? What types of tech and openings would be most unlike what I'm used to seeing in 2v2? I'm considering switching to 1v1. 2v2 has ways units are used that is different than 1v1, here are a couple examples: PZ versus TZ can go mass Dragoons against M&M. Pure Dragoons can beat pure M&M. TZ versus PZ often goes M&M against a Protoss which would be a bad build in 1v1 T versus P.
|
I don't want to sound cocky but: Why not click on one of the dozen or so streams on the right first and take a look by yourself? Or do you plan on transitioning (why not play both 2v2 and 1v1?) without watching any 1v1? What made you want to play 1v1 then in the first place?
Another question: How on earth did you not come across any 1v1 - played by you or others - in 16 years of BW?
What race do you play?
It's just hard to answer your question as there are not just a few different strategies, but hundreds and thousands of differences that would have to be named. + Show Spoiler +For example, the game starts completely different if you have to defend gateway-units with only a few marines in the first few minutes against a Protoss that can concentrate on you 100%, but at the same time you have to only expect gateway-units (and not also zerglings).
Generally I'd say that it's not so much about the use of the units itself that's different but rather that in 1v1 all the short-term 2-on-1-scenarios are missing (obvious point you also made), so you will have a relatively more linear early-/mid-game in a way - or rather much more leeway for economic openings or defensive play with fewer units. You cannot combine your army with your ally, but you also don't have to expect two opponents to show up. It's rather the lack of these dynamics that shape what the differences between 2v2 and 1v1 look like, I think, with manifold implications. It means that you not always benefit much from quickly building up your army count - but then again you can get punished hard if you don't have enough units when your opponent attacks (as there's no ally you can stall for).
Also: Obviously 1v1 is much more "personal" as it's only you vs only him/her, it feels completely different if you don't have an ally that can help you (or drag you down...).
Generally you will see players expanding much faster (actually right away after the initial rax/factory/gate/pool most of the time, or even before any of that) because you can get away with it against only one opponent. + Show Spoiler +One quick example is the early game in TvZ: In 1v1 Terran (theoretically) can hold any early-pool with just a standard 11-rax and should be ahead because of the higher worker count, so Zergs tend to go 12hatch in the natural (before pool) which again (theoretically) can defend any early-rax-opening. Thus the standard in TvZ is 1rax-expand vs 12hatch-expand. Still players can try to catch their opponents off guard with early pools/rax. This and the lack of 2vs1-attacks leads to more options to be resilient in the midgame, leading to longer games with elaborated lategame strategies where both players max out on 200/200 supply and take many bases.
|
|
On May 19 2016 04:21 Psyonic_Reaver wrote: Liquipedia???
Given that I completely agree that OP should use LP a lot, as the basic guides for the three races name all the important openings and strategies e.g.... still:
If someone asks you a question, do you always answer "Internet?" or "Books?".
I think it's legit to ask as OP did. Could have studied a bit more in the first place and been a bit more specific... But there's a genuine benefit in talking to actual people even if every questions has already been answered somewhere at length. Asking others can shorten the learning process... makes us social... I can meme the smart-ass... (and there is no essay on 1v1 compared to 2v2 on LP that you can just read in one sitting... and the strategy section on this forum is almost dead anyways).
On May 19 2016 04:39 Highgamer wrote: (and there is no essay on 1v1 compared to 2v2 on LP that you can just read in one sitting...
behold: for a start just read this the other way around http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/Basic_2on2_Principles
(doesn't affect my other points tho)
|
Proxy hatcheries! Kau sets a good example. His heart is ample.
|
Norway28262 Posts
yeah.. Like every strategy is unique to one on one, they are very different. In terms of how you should expect to play and how others will play, I guess the chief difference is that in one on one, you will have a longer period of economic and technological build up. Every non-mirror matchup normally consists of both players expanding before or around the 5-6 minute mark. Some matchups are completely different from 2v2 play - in a pvz, you can expect protoss to build a second nexus and a stargate before they make their second gateway. Likewise zvp, zerg will sometimes have started their 5th hatchery before they build their 12th zergling. Even though the teamplay aspect is lost, I do feel that one on one is a significantly richer game experience, and more strategically demanding. There are more options for both players, more possible styles to employ, and seeing as how you will often be mining from 4 bases at the same time, it is far more demanding in terms of large army management and macroing. In addition, the late game starts earlier (because there early-mid game phases can be largely be skipped if both players feel like it), meaning you get to see significantly more high tech units. As a 2v2 player, you might rarely if ever have used science vessels, arbiters and defilers - in one on one games, these units are used in most matches (unless one player dies early, which does happen).
If you want more specific advice, you need to say something about the race you plan on playing, or preferably specific matchups. In fact, I'd advice you to simply play some one on one games, watch some one on one games, and then come back with more specific questions.
|
Man if Chill saw this in 2008, it would've been insta-locked =/
I think the general idea of the units stays the same, but the timing of everything changes...for instance, instead of terran making a bunch of MM to cover a zerg while they go for mutalisks, you have to make the right amount of units to cover your own expansion...you have to allocate your resources very carefully.
|
On May 22 2016 23:20 Liquid`Drone wrote: yeah.. Like every strategy is unique to one on one, they are very different. In terms of how you should expect to play and how others will play, I guess the chief difference is that in one on one, you will have a longer period of economic and technological build up. Every non-mirror matchup normally consists of both players expanding before or around the 5-6 minute mark. Some matchups are completely different from 2v2 play - in a pvz, you can expect protoss to build a second nexus and a stargate before they make their second gateway. Likewise zvp, zerg will sometimes have started their 5th hatchery before they build their 12th zergling. Even though the teamplay aspect is lost, I do feel that one on one is a significantly richer game experience, and more strategically demanding. There are more options for both players, more possible styles to employ, and seeing as how you will often be mining from 4 bases at the same time, it is far more demanding in terms of large army management and macroing. In addition, the late game starts earlier (because there early-mid game phases can be largely be skipped if both players feel like it), meaning you get to see significantly more high tech units. As a 2v2 player, you might rarely if ever have used science vessels, arbiters and defilers - in one on one games, these units are used in most matches (unless one player dies early, which does happen).
If you want more specific advice, you need to say something about the race you plan on playing, or preferably specific matchups. In fact, I'd advice you to simply play some one on one games, watch some one on one games, and then come back with more specific questions.
listen to this man, he knows his stuff when it comes to 1v1.
|
|
|
|