EPTLiquipedia Q&A #2 - Questions! - Page 3
| Forum Index > Brood War Strategy |
|
EsX_Raptor
United States2802 Posts
| ||
KwarK
United States43363 Posts
On November 04 2009 05:51 Espers wrote: Are there any situations/maps where a LurkerLing army would be better than a mass Hydra army when opening 3 hatch spire -> 5 hatch? Is there a reason why LurkerLing isn't used much because 3 hatch spire basically nullifies harrassment a lot which seems to be its weakness.. And on the flip side, what things should Protoss keep in mind when Zerg eventually starts playing LurkerLingDefiler? Especially on HBR when the ridges are held so easily. Corsairs. | ||
|
feuxfollets
United States61 Posts
Q2: Following the above question, on maps like HBR, is it viable to go 4 or 5 hatch muta and skip hydras? It is very difficult to defend a fourth base on HBR with ground, but the air distance to the top and bottom bases is very short and allows a muta army to defend much more easily. It also prevents P from taking his third base quickly as the mutas can move between the natural and the third over those cliffs while P's ground army cannot follow. This would theoretically result in a 4base vs 2base situation, very favorable for the Zerg. | ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
Hyvaa vs Violet on HBR showed this early aggression, however Hyvaa countered it by making 4 sunken colonies. Hyvaa still lost as his ZvP is far inferior to Violet's PvZ. There is a corollary to this question : Even if this is the appropriate counter to 5 hat hydra, will it be the appropriate counter at all levels of play? - I wrote a thread a few months ago exploring when this specific timing was, it was very long and theory crafty so it wasn't very widely read. However, it is a difficult, complex build to execute that involves specific probe cuttings. Especially with lower level mechanics the timing is difficult to get right. Also, a new map pool has been established for PL, and universal opinion seems to be that the maps are unfavored for protoss. Is this the case or is the perception flawed because of the current metagame? Some maps, such as Matchpoint even seem protoss favored in the results. Edit : There is an additional concern that occurred to me while watching Pusan vs Savior from PL. The appropriate counter to Savior's extreme turtle style of play would be the same expansionistic playstyle that Flying used vs Great. However, it is very difficult to determine whether a zerg player will opt for this playstyle or go for map control via a mass hydra with muta sniping build. It comes down to a scouting question, basically, how do you tell if zerg is going to macro extremely hard off of 3 or 4 bases behind crazy simcities and lurkers? This is a larger concern when laddering than when playing in PL (most zergs have really well known preferences for their zvp playstyle. Great is a notorious turtler). | ||
|
bladeip
Macedonia11 Posts
First, recall the game of Bisu vs Jaedong MSL Season 4 on Blue Storm. Now Jaedong won, but I think that Bisu had a pretty good advantage the entire game. I think this is a pretty good standard way to take on zergs and not some stratagy that will work like only one time (e.g. mass DTs or goon rushes). In that match I liked how he used the reaver to get his 2nd expansion really fast while at the same time doing some harass. I think that today protosses want to take on the 3 hatch spire into 5 hatch hydra on just two bases and when they play that way it usually comes down to the timings in the first engagements or how well was the templar sniping with muta or was protoss able to get a couple of good storms before his templar got sniped (e.g. Bisu vs Jaedong on HBR in SPL Ace match). Why don't protosses try to get their 2nd expansion fast and try to start building that protoss ball instead of trying to finish it off on 2 bases while at the same time trying to deny the zergs forth (with DTs for example)? | ||
|
WeakTuna
Canada71 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://photos-e.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc3/hs048.snc3/13543_168482436031_511946031_3026089_3688382_n.jpg) | ||
|
Monzterg
Sweden257 Posts
I am a horrible Protoss player so I can not figure this out and would love for you to give me some understandings! Fundamentally Zerg is the best race at economy development should they get to focus on that without threat. Protoss on the other hand are limited by their worker production rate but can on the other hand steadilly grow their army and economy simultaniously. Do you think that many of todays protoss players are passive for too long and are too bad at exploitng the fact that zerg grows very slowly if they are forced to make alot of units and defences while protoss grow fast even with high armyproduction rates. If that is true, why is protoss not playing more aggressive initial builds? It seems to me that protoss would benefit from a slower development rate match where both races are making alot of units and trying to grow their economy during war rather the skipping this and jumping straight to the mid-game without any battles fought. It seems protoss by trying to fast forward like this puts them behind the zerg, and then they are trying to turn it all around by using special units like templars. I guess my question is: Why do we see the forge first opening in 90%+ of games? | ||
|
Zortch
Canada635 Posts
Why wasn't the game more one sided later on? | ||
|
KwarK
United States43363 Posts
On November 09 2009 02:31 Monzterg wrote: Here is a question ive been wondering alot about. I am a horrible Protoss player so I can not figure this out and would love for you to give me some understandings! Fundamentally Zerg is the best race at economy development should they get to focus on that without threat. Protoss on the other hand are limited by their worker production rate but can on the other hand steadilly grow their army and economy simultaniously. Do you think that many of todays protoss players are passive for too long and are too bad at exploitng the fact that zerg grows very slowly if they are forced to make alot of units and defences while protoss grow fast even with high armyproduction rates. If that is true, why is protoss not playing more aggressive initial builds? It seems to me that protoss would benefit from a slower development rate match where both races are making alot of units and trying to grow their economy during war rather the skipping this and jumping straight to the mid-game without any battles fought. It seems protoss by trying to fast forward like this puts them behind the zerg, and then they are trying to turn it all around by using special units like templars. I guess my question is: Why do we see the forge first opening in 90%+ of games? Speed upgraded zerglings rape early game so hard. They can run past and snipe zealots as they move in support, they can gank your main and they can simply overwhelm and get decent cost effectiveness vs anything P has. Plus you never know how many they have. You don't know when he's not got many and you can push out with 5 zealots and when he has 20 and you are about to get surrounded and lose 5 zealots. If you don't attack really early you get to deal with 2 base 2 gas lair vs 1 gas protoss. That's just not happening. Protoss needs that 2nd gas to compete with zerg. You need obs, you need upgrades, you need storm. Add in the mutalisk factor, you need dragoons or archons or corsairs and you need to be able to defend quickly. Without 2 gas you are simply overstretched and will either be harassed to death, overwhelmed or end up camping but without an exp. You have to understand Protoss isn't being passive early. If Z doesn't keep the Protoss economic machine in check by threatening cheese and denying scouting then Protoss will just surge ahead. Unharassed, Protoss will 200/200 so fast. Your assumption here is wrong "Fundamentally Zerg is the best race at economy development should they get to focus on that without threat." Protoss have a bunch of offensive options. From mass sairs to dragoon timing attacks to speedlot zealot attacks to simply FEing into 2 gates then 5 slow zealots. The FE does not limit Protoss options. There is nothing wrong with FE builds. | ||
|
KwarK
United States43363 Posts
| ||
|
ReiKo
Croatia1023 Posts
| ||
|
ReiKo
Croatia1023 Posts
| ||
|
viewer
Canada662 Posts
| ||
Aesop
Hungary11305 Posts
| ||
|
atm0sphere33
Canada130 Posts
| ||
|
TheAntZ
Israel6248 Posts
On November 17 2009 23:29 atm0sphere33 wrote: Has this happened yet? the threads been up for a while. If not, then this is not really a question but a viable topic of discussion would be the possibility of incorporating the dark archon into a standard protoss build, as mael is a great counter to muta sniping. Something along the line of 2 dts for early harass and map control and protect them as much as u protect corsairs to do some kind of DA / mael timing midgame Go to this thread for the mp3 -> http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=105313 Go to this thread to discuss dark archons in PvZ -> http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=103526 | ||
| ||
