|
The idea of killing larvae based units is an idea i've mentioned to some regarding decision making during certain battles. Essentially, people think in terms of gas and minerals fairly easily. IE, don't build a hydra den in ZvZ to kill an overlord because it wastes about ~100gas which is 1 mutalisk. I find it useful also to think in terms of larvae.
Oftentimes, when fighting an opponent (of any race) one sometimes chooses to focus fire certain units. Typical examples are targeting templars in ZvP, tanks in ZvT, or lurkers in PvZ and TvZ.
What I argue is that, specifically in PvZ and TvZ, when faced w/ the common but oh-so-effective lurker/ling combo, when is it a good idea to target the lurkers and when is it not?
Despite the fact that MANY people will tell you to target the lurkers specifically (in fact almost everyone advocates lurker targeting in TvZ), I argue that oftentimes its more important to attack the zerglings because they are heavily "larvae based"
Lets take a very common example: ZvT. Its a mineral expo map (like korhal or nostalgia) and you have 8-10 marines, 2 bats, and 2 medics outside the zergs base. The zerg went 2 hatch fast lurker+ling and leaves his base w/ the standard 4 lurkers and 20-24 lings. What should terran attack?
Obviously a ling+lurker force is neutralized if either all the lurkers are killed OR all the lings are killed. Obviously 4 lurkers can't do shit to MnM since terran micro is so strong nowadays. And, 24 lings are going to do shit against a strong MMF force. Thus, I argue it is most important to try to kill all the lings off. For, 24 lings equates to 12 larvae. By killing off 24 lings, terran effectively delays the zerg much longer, as it will take longer to rebuild that many zerglings.
In the more common case, when a terran target fires the lurkers and kills them off, its only 1 larvae per lurker to replace. So, although its always nice to keep a zerg's lurker count down, the zerg will be able to rebound more quickly after losing all the lurkers as opposed to all the lings.
Or, in ZvP for example, lets say a zerg is going to rush down protoss's new natural expansion w/ fast lurker+ling, and you have about 8-9 speed zealots+1 archon outside zerg's base to delay the attack. ALSO, lets say that this expansion only has 2 morphing cannons or so, and no robo bay any time soon. Many protosses will attempt to target fire the lurkers as to prevent undetectable units from reaching their base. However, again, i think its most important to kill the lings off as quickly as possible, this will delay the attack far more than killing the lurkers.
Last ZvZ example: On Neo Forte, i have had the experience where a zerg will early expand on 12 and standard tech to mutalisks. If i have hatched in my main, i will immediately try to get 2 more hatches as quickly as possible (both at my expo naturally) and i will attempt to simply overrun my opponent w/ ling scourge. I know this will work because my opponent will be so far behind in larvae. He will oftentimes focus so much on gassing quickly at the natural, that he will be low on money for more hatcheries. Thus, although he will have more gas than i will, i'm simply producing far more units due to my larvae advantage that he cannot hold both his main and natural.
Just another aspect of thinking i thought i'd like to share : ]
|
Pretty interesting way to look at it. Sometimes I also wonder as a Terran player whether it's better to target lurkers or just attack move and let the rines target lings. The only thing you forgot is that lurkers need to first be built by building hydras and then morphed into lurkers. This makes the decision a bit harder since making lurkers takes a lot more time than lings do. I do understand your point though, but it seems more situational more than anything else. Other thing to keep in mind is that lurkers are gas intensive while lings are mineral only.
|
Day[9] fighting !!!!!!
I never thought that. I always thought attacking the lurkers would be better in tvz. Day[9] is my favorite nonkorean zerg besides mondragon and midian.
|
Interesting thoughts... In tvz I do not target fire my tanks at all.... and microing vs lurker/ling with m/m I will take what I can get whether it be lurkers or lings =D. I have never thought of zerg units in terms of lavae cost.. You say the lings are more important... However we all know economically, the lurkers are far more expensive. and take much longer to produce than just lings. When detection is limited or delayed IE: you only have scanner(limited scan) or protoss doesn't have robo... the lurkers are the bigger threat than the lings are. The zerg can simply settle for a contain and just xpo freely. Anyway I am anxious to find out how effective it is to go after the lings instead of the lurkers. I will try it out and let you know how my experience goes
|
|
nice idea, but why you think killing lings in pvz will delay him more? p will just lose his expansion if untouched lurks will reach there... no?
|
Larvae usage is also why I like savior[gm] zvt that he showed at least vs. oov in the last MSL. Oov let him get away with 3 hat mut (IIRC) -> mutalurk with no lings -> mass econ hive tech. The interesting part was midgame usage of larvae--savior stalled with mutalurk like mad, using the fewest possible larvae to keep oov from getting to his bases. Thus, he could pump the rest shamelessly into drones..
Yeah, it takes about the same amount of fire to kill 4 lings (2 larvae) as 1 lurk (1 larvae). There's a real problem with low hat styles with your lings killed, yes.
|
it's a good thought.. but if that method were truly more efficient we would have seen it more often in the progaming scene by now right?
|
Best Starcraft Broodwar Strategy i've ever read. Thanks day for informing us about the art of larvaes. I'll actually try to keep in mind what u said when im fighting a zerg.
|
On February 15 2006 22:26 araav wrote: nice idea, but why you think killing lings in pvz will delay him more? p will just lose his expansion if untouched lurks will reach there... no?
If you kill all the lings before he gets to your base then your cannons won't die. And without the lings you can still kill the lone lurker. Whereas if you kill the lurker the lings will still take out your cannons and you'll be vulnerable to the next lurks.
|
In TvZ, isn't the best way to micro is to simply kill as much as you can without losing anything? Like say if its lurk ling combo, if he burrows his lurkers too far forward and earlier before his lings come in, in that case you target 1 lurk and run away after you've killed it, killing any following lings which are too slow to turn back. However if his lings come at the same time as his lurks or before, you move out of the lurkers range and rape all the lings. I think you should just kill what you can without getting hurt.
|
On February 15 2006 23:00 skyglow1 wrote: In TvZ, isn't the best way to micro is to simply kill as much as you can without losing anything? Like say if its lurk ling combo, if he burrows his lurkers too far forward and earlier before his lings come in, in that case you target 1 lurk and run away after you've killed it, killing any following lings which are too slow to turn back. However if his lings come at the same time as his lurks or before, you move out of the lurkers range and rape all the lings. I think you should just kill what you can without getting hurt.
yea, as a t player, i tend to agree with this. How the zerg moves his guys and in what order/position , extc, decides what i focus on. Ideally you want to get either the lurkers or the lings by themselves, but like i said, i basically react to what the zerg does.
I have never though of it in terms of larvae though, and i bet alot of people haven't. Interesting ~_~
|
On February 15 2006 22:41 [sj]tacticz wrote: it's a good thought.. but if that method were truly more efficient we would have seen it more often in the progaming scene by now right?
it is used! :D
i had a huge problem w/ this when playing against xellos
i would try to run around his MMF force outside my choke, and instead of attacking my lurkers, he would run directly upwards where my lings were running to try to surround, and then he'd kill all my lings. It was REALLY fucking annoying, especially considering i was 2 hatching T.T
|
I think it depends on the macro ability of the z, and battle position.
|
Well he took out your lings because he had the ability to without losing any units. Most players would have done that in that case I think?
|
as a zerg player i can concur that it is very hard to fight with lurker/ling when you only have 8 or so at any given time (because they keep dying off)
|
Actually, I find it harder to rebound when all the lurks are killed than when all the lings are killed - you said that lurks and lings become almost useless when not accompanied by other units, and you're right. But lurks take longer to make and cost more money than lings do - I could rebuild a 24 ling force off of two hatcheries in the time it took me to morph 6 lurks, and it wouldn't take me any gas. Also, lurkers are more useful by themselves, simply because they can sit burrowed and contain a terran until science vessels and tanks hit, and that buys the zerg time to recover. It's a toss-up, though (strange, considering it's TvZ). I agree that having my lings raped wouldn't be very easy to recover from, but I still think it's worse to lose such a gas-intensive unit, especially duing the midgame as zerg.
|
United States4471 Posts
In the TvZ example, I don't think you can ignore the gas factor in the targetting. While replacing a lurk may cost you less larva, it'll cost you more gas and the time it takes to hatch and morph may make up for the larva discrepancy. I also feel that Lurks w/o Lings > Lings w/o Lurks against M&M, but that's the opinion of an unskilled player so take it as you will. Every bit of gas you make the Z spend on replacing lurks takes away from the gas they'll have for teching later.
Not exactly the best post I've made in terms of clarity and organization, but thought I'd throw in some quick feedback. I'm not saying that Day is wrong, but that people shouldn't get too caught up in this new perspective and drastically change their playing. There are still other factors that remain that are very still valid and caused people to develop the general trends as they are.
|
in the PvZ with cannons warping in late: if only 2 lurks I would kill lings and 1 lurk. The archon can kill teh 2nd lurk even after its burrowed with all those lot meatshields. Plus, if you have normal cannon placement it would not be able to hit nexus without unburrowing.
|
On February 15 2006 23:53 XaI)CyRiC wrote: In the TvZ example, I don't think you can ignore the gas factor in the targetting. While replacing a lurk may cost you less larva, it'll cost you more gas and the time it takes to hatch and morph may make up for the larva discrepancy. I also feel that Lurks w/o Lings > Lings w/o Lurks against M&M, but that's the opinion of an unskilled player so take it as you will. Every bit of gas you make the Z spend on replacing lurks takes away from the gas they'll have for teching later.
Not exactly the best post I've made in terms of clarity and organization, but thought I'd throw in some quick feedback. I'm not saying that Day is wrong, but that people shouldn't get too caught up in this new perspective and drastically change their playing. There are still other factors that remain that are very still valid and caused people to develop the general trends as they are.
excellent point
i don't intend for people to ALWAYS target my so called "larvae based units." On nostalgia for example, killing 4 lurkers early game can be game deciding, as the zerg is so crunched for gas. Again, as you say, the purpose of my post is not to create drastic changes in play, but rather to provide another cool insight
|
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.
|
On February 16 2006 02:11 Day[9] wrote:Show nested quote +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
Not quite the phrase i was thinking of but it'll do
|
On February 15 2006 22:41 [sj]tacticz wrote: it's a good thought.. but if that method were truly more efficient we would have seen it more often in the progaming scene by now right? thats a bad argument for most things, it seems like pros would have thought of everything by now but the game is still evolving at a pro level and new tactics come into play or less used tactics become mainstream. just think about tvp in the last osl
|
United States5262 Posts
i stim and try to clean up the lings first. but once those lurkers start to burrow you gotta run out of there.
|
yeah all depends on the situation
there are some situations where it would make sense to attack the lings or even sometime where you have to..
but im still pretty sure most progamers target lurks if they get the chance ;p
|
why? the lings die faster and once the lings are dead as long as you have a tank or even a decent amount of mm he cant do anything with his lurks. also you can just sit and kill lings until his lurks start to burrow, move back and repeat, or shoot at lurks with tanks if he doesnt keep advancing. far better than trying to target lurks imo. only situation where its better to target lurks is when its necessary, like theyre trying to use lings as a cover to run lurks into your minline early game and other similar situations.
|
why can't we just nuke the hatches and kill the larvae producing machines period? =]
|
Very nice, maybe this is why IPX makes so few lings early game and just whores drones and hatcheries with his larvae count.
|
On February 16 2006 13:23 rawrx wrote: why can't we just nuke the hatches and kill the larvae producing machines period? =] that's chinese humor for you
|
Korea (South)11576 Posts
|
[QUOTE]On February 16 2006 09:38 Resonate wrote: [QUOTE]On February 16 2006 02:11 Day[9] wrote: [QUOTE]On February 16 2006 01:54 Resonate wrote: Why do you keep putting your name in your topic titles?[/QUOTE]
cuz i'm a huge badass[/QUOTE]
haha nice =] and oh i think they chinese humor was very funny.. o-o
|
Cool post. But the example of xellos using it, Im guessing he didn't want to be surrounded so I battled one side of your army, the weakest=] you should run run
|
I got really high and read this post... and I must say... Starcraft has never been so crazy. cool thread title!
|
Im just guna say.. that .. you should always kill the most expensive vs a zerg.. becuz they can que 12 units (out of 3 hatchs) in like a second.. and have them all just as fast.. but if u make them spend more $$ then they are dying more economically internally.. Zerg doesnt always have the top of the line econ, ike 4 scv's per field Terrans and shit.
And on the note of killing zlings instead of lurks in TvZ thats just plain crazy.. lings are cheap and 2 per egg.. i think your trying for a pretty farfethc'd game strategy if you dont take out those splash damage gas expensive units..
|
what? in ZvT lings always rush behind lurkers, i always target a lurker in front, pull back so i don't get trapped between lings, and try to kill some lings off out of lurker range. people don't do what you say in progaming because it's not that hard to micro lings back behind lurkers, and terrans don't target zerglings because of the high possibility that their mnm will get surrounded by lings with lurkers doing most of the damage, also lings are cheap... by comparison it's a better idea targetting vultures than tanks in a large PvT battle.
|
On February 16 2006 04:35 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote: 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.
No, both points are wrong, because the amount of gas you have doesn't change in either situation. You would have to spend it on lurkers in case A, not drones, otherwise you would get raped by m/m, and case B doesn't change anything except for the fact that you have x(125) more gas than you do in case A, where x is the amount of lurkers you made - and that should be spent on... well, until you get an expo gas, more lurks or scourge for sci.
|
On February 16 2006 14:16 CaucasianAsian wrote: Lurker = 2 Larvae... no...
|
|
MyLostTemple
United States2921 Posts
i think days a fat newbie who's nerdy in r/l
|
On February 16 2006 14:16 CaucasianAsian wrote: Lurker = 2 Larvae...
in what game?
|
On February 16 2006 05:15 TreK[cF] wrote:lurks are always more devestating, lings can be outmicroed more easily 
Cept when ur Julyzerg :p
|
|
in TvZ I would bring 2 firebats for the lings and then target lurks with marines; with 14 marines you could keep a couple supporting the firebats against the lings...keep medics out in front with the bats. I would definetely try to have at least a tank at this point though, rather than try to "boxer" my MnM against lurkers and risk a disaster.
|
Wow...was this bump really necessary?
|
Oh hey, a strat forum question I can answer:
On November 07 2008 07:27 Centric wrote: Wow...was this bump really necessary? No.
|
well you need to reduce the lurkercount... if the initial 4 gets reinforced with another 4 it starts getting scary for the mnms
|
On November 07 2008 07:25 milkshake87 wrote: in TvZ I would bring 2 firebats for the lings and then target lurks with marines; with 14 marines you could keep a couple supporting the firebats against the lings...keep medics out in front with the bats. I would definetely try to have at least a tank at this point though, rather than try to "boxer" my MnM against lurkers and risk a disaster. wow man. this is a revelation. i would never have thought to target the lurker, nor to bring a tank.
|
On November 07 2008 08:28 capek wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2008 07:25 milkshake87 wrote: in TvZ I would bring 2 firebats for the lings and then target lurks with marines; with 14 marines you could keep a couple supporting the firebats against the lings...keep medics out in front with the bats. I would definetely try to have at least a tank at this point though, rather than try to "boxer" my MnM against lurkers and risk a disaster. wow man. this is a revelation. i would never have thought to target the lurker, nor to bring a tank. Sarcasm detected.
|
Is it a coinencidence his name ends in 87?
|
On November 07 2008 07:32 AnOth3rDAy wrote: well you need to reduce the lurkercount... if the initial 4 gets reinforced with another 4 it starts getting scary for the mnms
Depends where you are in the map. If you start at the zerg's nat, and they keep sacrificing a lurker+ling army to try to advance and you annihilate all of the lings, he is forced to stop, because you pick off a lurker, then back off, he advances (again with more lings), take off all of the lings, pick off a lurker, and back off again. Hopefully you can do this 2-3 times b/c by the time he's at your nat he's severely behind because he had to keep making lings and you should have macro'd up an army superior to his.
I agree that you don't really have this choice if he's morphed them in front of your nat but that's when you should have tank tech or good mnm micro (SK terran) to get you out of that situation.
I actually think that that's the reason FBH's TvP sucks. TvP you really have to keep a concentrated army and FBH is a fan of attacking, backing off, attacking, backing off, attacking, so on and so forth. He did this a lot against Bisu and as Terran you really have to position your units well and you're stuck once the attack actually starts. FBH did a lot of unseiging and moving while the battle was taking place, which is fine TvZ but in TvP you have to remember that the zeal/goon combo is going to eat you alive while you're trying to retreat.
|
On November 07 2008 11:40 Avidkeystamper wrote: Is it a coinencidence his name ends in 87? close...but no cigar
|
On November 07 2008 12:47 thunk wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2008 07:32 AnOth3rDAy wrote: well you need to reduce the lurkercount... if the initial 4 gets reinforced with another 4 it starts getting scary for the mnms Depends where you are in the map. If you start at the zerg's nat, and they keep sacrificing a lurker+ling army to try to advance and you annihilate all of the lings, he is forced to stop, because you pick off a lurker, then back off, he advances (again with more lings), take off all of the lings, pick off a lurker, and back off again. Hopefully you can do this 2-3 times b/c by the time he's at your nat he's severely behind because he had to keep making lings and you should have macro'd up an army superior to his. I agree that you don't really have this choice if he's morphed them in front of your nat but that's when you should have tank tech or good mnm micro (SK terran) to get you out of that situation. I actually think that that's the reason FBH's TvP sucks. TvP you really have to keep a concentrated army and FBH is a fan of attacking, backing off, attacking, backing off, attacking, so on and so forth. He did this a lot against Bisu and as Terran you really have to position your units well and you're stuck once the attack actually starts. FBH did a lot of unseiging and moving while the battle was taking place, which is fine TvZ but in TvP you have to remember that the zeal/goon combo is going to eat you alive while you're trying to retreat. There are a lot of pros who retreat with success because they know when to retreat and when not too. Retreating is better than losing your whole army because you dont lose the bulk of your main army. You will lose bits and pieces while retreating but but not the main hanbang like forgg vs kal on athena. Its not retreating thats makes fbh lose but his terrible decision making and game sense in general for tvp. Also sometimes you have to move around such as better positioning or your units are getting stormed etc.
I do agree that tvp is all about concentrated mass and imo one of the reasons why fbh, boxer, casy, hwasin's tvps arent as good as their other mus is because they emphasis too much on harass. I groan everytime they get attacked by toss and they are caught with too little vultures because they used them all on harassing. ( Hwasin vs bisu on byzantium -_- )
|
|
|
|