T2 - What's really going on here?

There is a new ladder map in PTE that might force some more long-term build orders before the spam phase begins. Both players start on a low metal lava planet with easy defensive positions. You probably won't want to completely ignore that planet, but you need to get up to the high mex metal planet really fast. I can imagine that this will result in some pretty elaborate build orders with adaptation based on what your scouting tells you about the other player.

Or you just don't make all that energy you need to expand via orbital and spam tanks to attack and win the game. I've not played that map yet, but that was my impression of it. Though I didn't count the mex on the lava planet. Has it less than 10 per player?

@tvinita has made some changes to it recently. The version I played seems to allow you to push hard on the lava planet if you want, but in the time it takes you to win they will be able to get to the metal planet. I know that chasing them shouldn't be hard if you have the whole lava planet, but the mex clusters on the second planet each were almost enough to match the entire mex count on the lava planet. I think it will be a fun map for a while as people play with different strategies, but I wouldn't mind seeing cheaper orbital launchers and a slightly higher cost to every orbital unit beyond the astraeus.

If you lose your whole base on the laval planet you will need to start again at 0 energy income. No matter how many mex you have that will take a long time to come back. Too long. You know how slow t1 energy builds up. No matter hoow much metal you have.

Getting to the other planet has a cost of about 23 Bolos (launcher + astraeus + fabber). If you can successfully defend against that big push using static defenses or other means, the orbital pays off fast. We might just need slightly cheaper lasers than we have even in PTE right now.

Are you considering energy costs in that calculation?

Obviously not. Energy is the limiting factor here.

"You don't just have Brutelords, you transition into Brutelords" (Day9) That sentence made me rethink all my Zerg strategy and made me a better Starcraft player.
In my opinion same goes for T2 in PA. You don't just have T2, you transition into T2 and right now none of the top tier replays show signs of transition. At least not the replays I am watching.
In my point of view the key to T2 are Energy Storages. Every top player manages to have a sureplus on ressources throughout the game. I experimented with sneaking in an Energy Storage occasionally. 4 Storages will enable you to build a T2 Factory with 10 Fabers without neglecting your current production and this will enable you to get T2 at around 12 minute mark. Using 2 advanced Fabers to get T2 economy started and mix in some shellers into your army will turn odds to your side.
So instead of thinking how can we change T2 we should start thinking, how can we integrate T2 into our current metagame. Start experimenting with storage. One of the most underestimated buildings in PA.

Storages tend to stay empty if you don't waste energy without them and players try to not waste energy. I can't see how you would want to fill those 4 energy storages before you start t2 to finish it at the 12 minute mark. Looking at data of elodea on pa stats he does sometimes waste 400k energy by minute 12, more often he doesn't even waste that much. Even in games where he wasted that much making 4 storages costs as much as making 4 pgens. Trying to make them at the right time will eat away energy from other things. Making them with t1 fabbers will cost you 1800 metal and 180000 energy. Not to mention that currently I think good players don't make 10 t1 fabbers, as they are just so horribly expensive (especially running them) that nobody likes them. (Poor t1 fabbers)

colin, you forgot the power of orbital fabbers.

Hmm indeed I didn't consider those. Why would I ever consider that kind of unit?
Looks like it is as powerful as a t2 engineer in terms of energy usage. Can that thing be used to support construction of stuff on the ground?

Yes, it can! It can also be a useful weapon if you want to go around eating the enemy's base from orbit and turning their delicious metal into your own robots.

I'm still waiting for the fix for Orbital fabber ground reclaim and teleporter building abilities. We have the bloody UC, after all. Get rid of the gimmick.

Using orbital fabbers to assist your T2 or just to assist an expanding fabber is a powerful tool, albeit an expensive one. On the ranked maps we have now, it just isn't worth it. The maps are too damn small.

Why don't you go to PA stats and look at profiles of top players. You will be surprised how many of them waste a lot more energy by the 12 minute mark.

yea, you should always get it and one fabber to constantly build pgens if you are getting off planet. Then use that power to suppot air fab spam getting metal. Then later on you get it to assist the t2 air factory out. It's very powerful

My thoughts are based on that data and I find it highly unlikely that a player could manage to make 4 energy storages, fill them and then use 10 t1 fabbers to get t2 by minute 12.

Ah thank you thank you. Also it's Broodlords, not brutelords. I'm a little annoyed at the incorrectness.
I am a zerg player. But I'm also magnanimous and will forgive the ignorant unwashed masses.

But that's exactly my point you're making. I don't have any idea why people don't even try?

I tried that argument with someone about 1v1 ladder... forget who. Basically I wanted to know why he didn't have even 1 fabricator building an advanced factory, and his response was it's not practical/viable? That it's better off getting 10 fabricators and building advanced factory as fast as possible but if you do that you're leaving a window open to lose.

I just can't get my head around it. Why can't people just try to expand a bit instead of blatantly attacking. Get a storage or 2, dedicate one fabricator to building advanced factories while you fortify/slowly expand and as you feel more secure, dedicate more fabricators?

The other argument made against me was that advanced units aren't cost effective? Which is a fair point, they're either too expensive for their effectiveness, or not effective enough for their expense. If that's the primary factor restricting advanced I can (semi) understand that. But if you're only thinking about that, you've ignored advanced economy, advanced defense structures.

This is exactly why 1v1 ladder is all about spamming. I can appreciate it "might" be the most effective way to play, but surely there's a way to effectively defend that strategy and get more advanced?

If there is not, then this is what people should be focusing on to try and fix, and the devs should be giving priority to. If they are not, then they are not giving priority to cost effective transitioning to advanced stuff. This would be a big failing, since it's a part of the game they're hindering people from accomplishing through negligence.
I don't enjoy being harsh, but I'm putting it there to see what people respond with.

If I built an energy storage early on in a game I would waste probably 1% energy... as it is, in an average competitive 1v1 I'd say I waste 15-20% which is too much and I should feel bad.

EDIT: Also HAPPY CHRISTMAS TO ALL

Merry Christmas to you too!

Surely T1 fabbers should have greater energy efficiency than T2 as a tradeoff for their lower raw metal throughput and limited build options.