Explaining the Clopsey7 final build

There was a lot of confusion over the build used by the winner of the final match of Clopsey7. Thankfully the player behind it has chosen to explain in some detail his reasoning.

This article will contain spoilers as to the result of Clopsey7, so if you didn’t see it live and you’re waiting on the VODs read no further.

Ok, so the meta has evolved alot since the last time i posted on build orders and i wanted to explain game 3 against clopse because i saw on zaphods twitch chat alot of confused people. To do that I need to quickly explain all about build orders in this patch.

Build orders are characterized by the number of fabbers you build. If you build 1 fabber, you are doing this for the quick 4 factories + late 2nd fabber on pgens, which will help you snowball into the midgame. The 1 fabber build puts you up about 60% more material over a 3 fabber dox build (e.g. 80 dox to 50 dox) but starts evening out around 5 minutes or so – it is designed to give you barely enough metal to support your early factory spam. Keep this in mind as it will become relevant later on here.

If you build 3 fabbers, you are doing 2 on mex expand, 1 on pgens. This is your macro build, which means you are only doing 2 factories to start before sinking time into 3 pgens before your factory spam. This will outspend and eventually win against the 1 fabber build if you can defend early game. I already made a video on this build so if you’re still not sure what exactly i mean, you should probably watch it first at here. This build should also easily beat out any possible vehicle build with good control and awareness.

If you build 2 fabbers, you are going for 3 factory start before pgens. This is not a good build because it is not good at anything in particular. The advantage of having a third fabber on pgen like in the macro 3 fabber build is not worth trading out for the unit advantage you get from 3 factories vs 2. It is worth trading out for the unit advantage you get from 4 factories vs 2 however.

To get into explaining game 3 of the clopsey final, should start by stating that 1 fabber vehicle build is stronger than 1 fabber dox build. Why? Because the advantage of dox is to contain in the early game and outmacro the vehicle player. You cannot transition into an outmacro build from a 1 fabber bot build however. Not without seriously compromising your unit count (you will be spending time on pgens to get up +fabbers), which will lead to you getting overrun by tanks. 1 fabber dox is arguably the best against other dox builds, but is not good against 1 fabber vehicle builds. This is why I was confident in going vehicles against clopse because he did exactly that.

However, I was unlucky to be expanding towards clopse, which meant his dox reached my fabber just barely before it would usually have enough tanks guarding it to prevent exactly this kind of snipe. The 1 fabber vehicle build is still generally solid. Just defend your fabber and be confident in knowing that your opponent has exactly the same ammount of eco as you – you’re not behind. Wait for him to become impatient and make mistakes, then counter attack and win the game. For the vehicle doubters, just rewatch the game on zaphod’s twitch vod page and you will see that clopse should have been relatively the same metal income as me throughout the game.

TL;DR 1 fabber vehicles is favoured against 1 fabber bots. 3 fabber bots is favoured against 1 fabber vehicles. 1 fabber bots is favoured against 3 fabber bots. 0 fabber of anything is just cheese.

Elodea has previously written eXodus a guide on the superb opening he used in King of the Planet 9.

Recommended Reading

About the author


Queller AI
  • 0

Uber announce Cloak and Danger tournament

Uber Entertainment, with support from eXodus eSports, will be putting on Planetary Annihilation’s second official tournament. Uber’s Community Manager, Brad Nicholson made the announcement. Sixteen of the most dangerous Planetary Annihilation players are about to square off in a legendary…

Read Article

Leave a Reply