|
I thought it was common practice to kill the lings first anyway, to make lurkers susceptible to marine shoot and run?
Even though it takes more larvae, the same thing applies..lings suck without lurkers, and the lurkers are going to suck without the lings. So if you kill the lurkers, he has to wait for more lurkers and spend more gas..kill the lings, has to wait for more lings. It's quicker and less expensive to rebuild the lings
But that's not what the thread is about..and I just realized that. I am tired and going to sleep
I kill the lings first, always have..but never considered the larvae aspect of what I was doing
|
Why do you keep putting your name in your topic titles?
|
Korea (South)17174 Posts
but against players like day9 you should target the gas units because he always has 3 larvae anyways!!!
|
On February 16 2006 01:54 Resonate wrote:
Why do you keep putting your name in your topic titles?
cuz i'm a huge badass
|
i don't think it takes much longer to reproduce 20 lings (from 3 hatches) than to reproduce 4 lurkers. you might be waiting for larvae, but hydras take longer than lings and then you still have to morph them. if someone's gonna stall me by killing my lings (which i try not to let happen, i.e. i pull back even if my lurkers aren't burrowed yet) i can add another hatch (pure lings doesn't consume all minerals) and tech on or save the gas. i think it's only a viable tactic if you're really in a desperate position where you have to buy some time. the zerg _will_ be happy about all the gas he saved at that time and he _will_ use it to his advantage later on.
edit: another way to put it: larvae don't really cost you much. you can just build one more hatch earlier than usual if you're low on larvae but high on resources. i've always wondered if you could auto-add an additional hatch in every game to build more drones/overlords because zergs are always so low on drones and adding some more would pay back those ~350 minerals pretty soon.
|
United States4991 Posts
On February 16 2006 01:57 Rekrul wrote:
but against players like day9 you should target the gas units because he always has 3 larvae anyways!!!
Well, he needs a perfect counter to stop all the cunning Terrans who will utilize this now!!
|
would the killing larva unit logic work for any other unit battles in zvt besides against lurker/ling
|
it's stuff like this post by day which is why he's top 3 USA and i'm D PGTour (positive record doesn't really matter)
|
problem with the ling/lurker example is that, for 24 lings 12 larvae are hatched relatively quickly
whereas you've got to make a hydralisk first and then morph into a lurker to get lurkers.
during this time you can easily make another 12 larvae for more lings..
so it doesnt slow the zerg down too much ;o
|
and the gas/resource factor.
|
Intresting point. Lings without lurkers must be even more useless ?
|
imo lings without lurkers >>> lurkers without lings (unless they are already burrowed in the terrans mineral line or on hold pos)
but that's off topic T_T
|
I think the most intersting thing isn't how long it takes to replace either type of unit but rather how the avalability of larvae will influence the zergs gameplan.
a) You kill of the lurkers which leave the zerg with high larvae count and fairly low gas. The logical choice is to use those larvae for something, the logical use would be to build drones because you allready have the lings.
b) You kill the zerglings and leave the zerg with low larvae count and high gas. The logical choice for me would then be to tech towards hive fairly fast.
Would be intersting with a good z players take on the situation, because if most players would react the same way (or if one way of reacting to the situation is signficantly better) this would more or less give T a way to controll the game in the direction that he wants.
|
|
|
lurks are always more devestating, lings can be outmicroed more easily 
|
interesting insight,never thought of it like that before. since when did you become such a deep thinker day o_o
|
Killing the lings sure is annoying, but at least if you only lose the lings your lurkers wont give up map control so easily allowing you to mantain your position (in most cases) while your lings come back, while if they kill your lurkers, you will have to retreat your lings prolly all the way back to your base until your lurkers come out which take a lot more time to make than the lings, and he will probably use this opportunity to contain you which will leave you in an uncomfortable situation.
|
u shoot the lurk when u wanna win the minibattle.
|
The ZvZ example to me is more of a thinking ahead/strategizing based on an upcoming tactic. Its not a given that your opponent will play into it 100%. So its A: commiting yourself to something that may backfire depending on how well you read your opponent and can play your strat and B: The general idea to me is more off of "playing on a lead" than anything else. Its sorta like if you are way ahead in a ZvT and really have all the time in the world to do what you want. You can macro perfectly, defend your expos and increase drones little by little while slowly teching defiler or whatever and it will be safer than say trying to switch to mass guardian quickly which would leave an opening for your opponent.
I see this sorta situation come up often when watching replays and I suppose I do it myself from time to time. Its a lot more of a Zerg based thing too, since they have the intitiative in games most of the time and you make leading decisions often. But its not too uncommon for a T to lose a ton of shit but maintain his upgrade advantage and just wait for that slip up from a Zerg so he can get back into the game.
|
This was a very interesting read Day. Please post more stuff like this when you come to think of it in the future. Besides I'm not sure I agree about the lurker/ling part. I mean, it's not like you are gonna have perfect micro every game. Even progamers fuck up and walk into lurker spines.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
