|
On TL, there are lots of questions like:
"Why are ghosts not used to lockdown BCs or carriers?"
"Why isn't bio/vessel used against Protoss?"
"Why isn't restoration used on vessels?"
"Why aren't valkyries used to kill interceptors?"
"Why aren't valkyries used to counter mutalisks?" (Commonly asked in the pre-2018 era!)
"Why isn't mech used against zerg?" (This was commonly asked before mech switch was popularized by Fantasy/Flash/others in 2008-2010!)
*
*
*
Sometimes, there are fundamental reasons why a unit or strategy is bad. Other times, people think they know why X is bad, only to be shown by Fantasy, Ssak, Flash, Bisu, Effort, ... that X isn't actually bad.
Let's discuss: what commonly-asked-about units/strategies are *actually fundamentally bad*, in that they will never ever enter the meta in the next 10 years? And what might be simply a matter of figuring out the right way to use a unit or approach?
Example: "Ghosts can't be used TvT against battlecruisers because tanks often supplement battlecruisers, and tanks have much longer range than lockdown."
(Fundamental reason)
or
"Corsairs aren't used against Terran beause Disruption web requires a fleet beacon, at which point carriers are a much better use of the money -- but it could have situaitonal use to stop sharp timing pushes, or supplement with carriers in cases where storm is infeasible (e.g. a vulture-heavy terran, or a semi-island map)."
(Fundamental reason, but allows for exceptional cases)
or
"Restoration isn't used on vessels since APM issues, and medic energy is low when plague is out -- so most medics won't have enough energy to restore vessels which must be active on the map at all times. There could be meta shifts with fast medic energy upgrade + more medics are produced, and terran 3rd gas earlier, that make restoration feasible"
(Nuanced reason, opens up possibilities for use conditional on other meta shifts).
I made these reasons up and they're maybe totally wrong, but the first reason is "fundamnetal" whereas the last reason is "in the current meta, there isn't room, but perhaps with changes XYZ it could be feasible."
Let's not forget how many threads were devoted to why Dark archon isn't good vZ (until Best v Action), how mech isn't good vZ (until Flash/Fantasy/others popularized), how Valks weren't good vZ except for very narrow valkonic pushes (until Remastered bug fix and recent meta shifts), ....
Often times, things aren't good until they are. But some things are fundamentally bad. I'd like this thread to open up a discussion between which is which.
|
most the time the answer is time.
|
I object. If you have 0 air upgrades and have been playing ground toss, carriers are not a better use of your money than corsairs just because you have to build a fleet beacon. 0/0 carriers against 3/2 terran feels so bad. Disruption web on the other hand...
|
to get upgrades u need money and... (?)
|
why don’t terrans spread their tanks in tvp the same way zergs spread their lurkers in zvp?
|
Why don't Protoss go for +1 armor first instead of +1 attack in PvZ? Armor upgrades usually benefit melee units more than attack upgrades when going against ranged units so it seems like the armor upgrade would be much better for zealots vs hydras. Additionally, later in the game Protoss puts out a lot of their damage through psi storm which isn't affected by attack upgrades.
I can see two main issues with going for armor before attack. First, the attack upgrade is very good for dragoons and delaying the first attack upgrade also delays +2 and +3 which seems like a big deal. Second, the +1 attack on zealots lets them two shot zerglings so zerg player could respond to armor first by building more zerglings than usual to fight the zealots head-on. I really have no idea how much better this would be over current standard play however.
I know that armor upgrades don't affect shields but even then the +1 armor seems very good against hydralisks. I vaguely recall some pros trying out +1 armor first but as far as I know it's still very uncommon. What made them decide that +1 armor was inferior to +1 attack first?
|
United Kingdom12024 Posts
Why are dark archons not used more in PvZ - whenever they are used they seem to be insanely good and especially late game for feedback against defilers Maelstrom just seems to be an amazing spell against both hydras and mutas. Like if you're past the super early game and you have the templar archives anyway why not just make one?
|
time + resources + effort = efficiency
If you lack it, your oppo will have it and ez win vs you. That's the root answer to all of these.
|
On September 12 2023 19:33 Qikz wrote:
Why are dark archons not used more in PvZ - whenever they are used they seem to be insanely good and especially late game for feedback against defilers Maelstrom just seems to be an amazing spell against both hydras and mutas. Like if you're past the super early game and you have the templar archives anyway why not just make one?
Their biggest drawbacks are how slow they are to ready and how much of a one and done unit they are. Pure casters are honestly just not very good and most casters have utility in addition to just casting spells for when they run out of energy (e.g. vessals detect, arbiters cloak, defilers can just consume and never be out of energy). Dark archons start off as useless red blobs, in most cases will cast only one spell in a fight, after which they are back to being fat useless red blobs that take up 4 supply. Their main competition for gas are high Templars whom you need anyway, become ready to cast spells much faster than darchons, and most importantly can morph into archons to be useful after casting rather than blobbing around.
They are really just sub-optimal in the most common midgame and the niche situations in which they are really good in are not very common. They're good vs mutas midgame, but again suffer from being slow to ready, hence you need to scout the mutas, for which you will probably need corsairs which makes making more corsairs is the more natural response. Against hydras you really would rather have more storms.If you went citadel first, they're a more natural response for mutas i guess but the problem there is going citadel first and having no scouting kind of blows.
Late game they are pretty good but requires the prerequisite of already having an army and again suffer from how slow they are to ready and how one and done they are. They are honestly best used with late game corsair carrier compositions, but semi-island and island maps are not really a thing so the situation is so niche that its barely worth mentioning.
|
On September 10 2023 23:31 Crimson)S(hadow wrote:
why don’t terrans spread their tanks in tvp the same way zergs spread their lurkers in zvp? Probably too much micro because more tanks are built in TvP than there are lurkers built in ZvP?
|
Why don't Terrans research Optical Flare in TvZ to blind the lurkers guarding the ramp of the 3rd base for ez wins? 
|
On September 21 2023 03:43 PaxViaAtomi wrote:Why don't Terrans research Optical Flare in TvZ to blind the lurkers guarding the ramp of the 3rd base for ez wins?
Because blinding all Lurkers in a stack is an inferior non-possibility to irradiating all the Lurkers in a stack?
|
What's the reason for why ghosts can't be used to shutdown arbiter recalls? Countering with vessels seems really inconsistent due to EMPs long cast time. Less supply and slightly cheaper too (although you need to tech into an extra line)
|
On September 21 2023 05:46 Freakling wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2023 03:43 PaxViaAtomi wrote:Why don't Terrans research Optical Flare in TvZ to blind the lurkers guarding the ramp of the 3rd base for ez wins? Because blinding all Lurkers in a stack is an inferior non-possibility to irradiating all the Lurkers in a stack?
Optic Flare is much cheaper than irradiate (same mana cost but on a cheaper unit) and is available much sooner. It's a different timing that could work as a surprise play. Of course, if Zergs know to expect it, they can prepare in some basic ways, such as using drones or lings or mutas to spot for the lurkers. (Pre-stacking the lurkers isn't always viable because in many games, the Zerg only barely gets the lurkers in place in time and may even rely on a ramp egg to buy time as the high-ground lurkers morph.)
Optic Flare's crippling weakness is that it's all-or-nothing, since a single unit can spot for the rest of a group.
|
On September 21 2023 05:46 Freakling wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2023 03:43 PaxViaAtomi wrote:Why don't Terrans research Optical Flare in TvZ to blind the lurkers guarding the ramp of the 3rd base for ez wins? Because blinding all Lurkers in a stack is an inferior non-possibility to irradiating all the Lurkers in a stack?
Irradiate does burrowed splash?
|
Optic flare to deal with lurkers ?
Wouldn't you just be able to have zergling/overlord around to solve the problem ?
|
In ZvP Kespa era (or even early remastered days) pros used to more often open up going sair/reaver but I feel like I almost NEVER see it any more unless it's like a totally surprise 1-off build in a BoX series in ASL or something.
I'm guessing it was just determined to be too risky compared to standard gateway army openings / too susceptible to ogre zerg (since at least gateway openings you can make goons/archons to support sairs)? Or am I missing something? Just miss that in the meta because those games were so fun to watch.
FYI I mean something like this: https://www.youtube.com/live/ccHowdvT5SA?si=l1-WsQbe0t7adshV&t=5270
1 stargate and a fast reaver into more traditional army. Not 2stargate mass reaver.
|
Why don't Zerg use more Queens even if it's against SK Terran?
My main theory in mind is for Parasites and faster Command Center take downs. There's no other further tech investments to research the other upgrades nor is it out of the way if a Zerg goes for Hive anyways. The niches of the 2 other functions still has some value.
My first guess would be the APM limitations, but is that really it?
|
Been watching some recent games from the ASL.
One thing that has really surprised me is how not enough players are opening 3 hatch hydra in ZvP...and how outdated the "standard" 3 hatch -> spire play seems.
When I used to play on iccup, I would absolutely stomp just about every protoss using the following:
- Overpool/11hatch -> 3 hatch hydra.
- Make a few hydras to defend overlords, and pressure protoss into making cannons. Immediately drop down your 4th hatchery at a 4th base.
- Drone heavy, sim city by adding on evos and hatchery 5+6.
- Add sunkens (and spores if necessary to defend 2 star corsair). Defend with sunken/hydra/ling while getting upgrades and teching to hive ASAP (skip spire).
- Defilers w/ consume, upgrade adrenal glands for zerglings. Add on macro hatcheries as needed.
- Move out with your overwhelming (upgraded) hydra/ling/defiler army. Dark swarm protoss 3rd (and 4th if they're greedy), right click with lings.
If for whatever reason they are still in the game, add ultras and keep expanding. Your upgrades and early economic lead should be snowballing into an unstoppable army.
Gg. Zz. EZ-PZ.
|
Why don't Players practice more instead of posting about theory crafting? :D
In all seriousness, Most of the reasons why people dont do X vs a particular race is because that race has a good enough counter vs X that "if" it is scouted, the chances of winning drop dramatically.
Like bio vs Toss (storm reaver).
My favorite example has always been dark archon vs zerg. In theory it is the perfect unit since it allows a storm to do its full damage.
In practice, while you are casting malestrom, you could be casting another storm. Yes, it is great vs muta sniping your HTs, but they can just snipe the DA with hydras before going in with the mutas. Or counters your main with mutas because you went DA instead of corsairs, while sniping the HTs coming out of the gates at that time.
It is something to note tho. The top players play the game so much taht have probably tried everything we can come up with at this point and found out its not "better".
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
