|
Which strategies in any matchup are low investment and require more investment from the opponent to beat most of the time?
I had this discussion in one of the ASL threads, but they tend to die after a while. I still think it's a good discussion.
One of the examples is 973 since Protoss has to make cannons, but still might lose some buildings along the way and the Zerg can drone to 30+ drones any time they wish. The only real loss is the Zerg never droning and attacking into 7 or more cannons and/or storm. Or forgetting to leave some hydras to protect overlords and not being able to drone. So if you deny scouting there's no reason not to do it almost every game.
Another example is the 8 gate not quite so all-in attack vs. Zerg. Once you get storm/dragoon you force a bad muta ball into templar trade (like 11 muta for 3 templars). You can even get a dark archon to maelstrom + storm instead (but you'll be missing the 3 templars to begin with). The only loss condition is continuing to trade without storms and actually pushing in. Using a bunch of storms is basically going to put you ahead while you comfortably take a third.
One of the examples I've stated that I'm finding out personally is building a lot of mutalisk vs. Terran. Not only does it keep you safer, it makes the Terran spend more on turrets, lets you snipe more SCVs, keeps the Terran honest (can't just tech to vessel). I've tried the lower muta count strategies, but it's just harder and you don't get the free wins when the Terran doesn't cover his whole base.
What examples can you think of? Maybe going reaver against Terran? Seems like it's just always good and forces turrets/goliaths that the Terran wouldn't necessarily want to build so early
|
an interesting question.
for PvT reaver it s dependent on your reaver control. you re also one error away from immediately losing.
I d say PvP 2 gate vs 1 gate core fits your description. ZvT crazy zerg? (I guess more at lower levels than pro level).
|
On October 16 2025 21:35 WGT-Baal wrote:
an interesting question.
for PvT reaver it s dependent on your reaver control. you re also one error away from immediately losing.
I d say PvP 2 gate vs 1 gate core fits your description. ZvT crazy zerg? (I guess more at lower levels than pro level).
Most games you're not really transitioning from crazy zerg
I don't mean a strong strategy (BBS is a strong strategy), I mean a strategy that makes your opponent spend an equal amount of resources not to die against and allows you to transition away from it for free even if they "counter" it perfectly (BBS is dead against a pool first, for example)
|
8 rax might be close to it, it's only slightly disadvantaged against overpool (you can just wall off an expand instead of making more marines), but it does die to 4 pool pretty badly because your barracks is way out of position
but against hatch first it's an advantage almost every time, huge mining time loss for Zerg, huge tech delay, and even possibly drone loss, having to make a ton of zerglings, etc.
it's not a complete freeroll, but it's good most of the time
A better freeroll is gas steal on 1v1 maps, since it forces Terran into rax expand, but also to miss some mining time eventually to clear it so you can easily 1 gate expand with no gas. I see no downside unless the Terran builds gas before barracks, in which case you spent almost nothing (since you get to scout and harass with the probe anyway)
|
I think generally the free-roll effect is more common against Zerg since larva is so limited early on.
Anything you can do to apply small amounts of pressure and force defenses is really strong, so long as you don't then get busted by the lings (or whatever) you just made the Zerg make.
Another candidate for a free-roll move:
Making exactly 5 muta ZvP once Protoss map goes dark (eg to mass hydra)
Protoss is likely to either overmake Corsair/mineral cannons (and risk getting Hydra busted) or undermake Corsair (and risk being overwhelmed by an ogre of Mutas)
Maybe there's an efficient defense but I don't see it.
We see Effort and Soma doing this lately, I think it'll be more common in future, especially if Soma has a prominent ASL game with it.
Re: Hydra pressure
I think with Hydra bust if you can't get in you really want to not attack at all & contain.
You spent a bunch of money building Hydra and if you don't attack you still have them.
Cannons won't come attack you.
|
On October 24 2025 20:29 ajfirecracker wrote:
Making exactly 5 muta ZvP once Protoss map goes dark (eg to mass hydra)
Protoss is likely to either overmake Corsair/mineral cannons (and risk getting Hydra busted) or undermake Corsair (and risk being overwhelmed by an ogre of Mutas)
Maybe there's an efficient defense but I don't see it.
We see Effort and Soma doing this lately, I think it'll be more common in future, especially if Soma has a prominent ASL game with it.
The two starport is quite good against it, you actually need spores against it, or you might lose overlords and let DTs in
But against a normal build it's basically the strongest opening because it blocks the combined corsair + zealot attack quite well with scourge and muta. I can see why it's basically the new standard. If you watch Soma's stream unless he cheeses early, this is his new normal build
|
On October 16 2025 17:13 iopq wrote:
Which strategies in any matchup are low investment and require more investment from the opponent to beat most of the time?
I had this discussion in one of the ASL threads, but they tend to die after a while. I still think it's a good discussion.
One of the examples is 973 since Protoss has to make cannons, but still might lose some buildings along the way and the Zerg can drone to 30+ drones any time they wish. The only real loss is the Zerg never droning and attacking into 7 or more cannons and/or storm. Or forgetting to leave some hydras to protect overlords and not being able to drone. So if you deny scouting there's no reason not to do it almost every game.
Another example is the 8 gate not quite so all-in attack vs. Zerg. Once you get storm/dragoon you force a bad muta ball into templar trade (like 11 muta for 3 templars). You can even get a dark archon to maelstrom + storm instead (but you'll be missing the 3 templars to begin with). The only loss condition is continuing to trade without storms and actually pushing in. Using a bunch of storms is basically going to put you ahead while you comfortably take a third.
One of the examples I've stated that I'm finding out personally is building a lot of mutalisk vs. Terran. Not only does it keep you safer, it makes the Terran spend more on turrets, lets you snipe more SCVs, keeps the Terran honest (can't just tech to vessel). I've tried the lower muta count strategies, but it's just harder and you don't get the free wins when the Terran doesn't cover his whole base.
What examples can you think of? Maybe going reaver against Terran? Seems like it's just always good and forces turrets/goliaths that the Terran wouldn't necessarily want to build so early
12 gas goon or zealot first in PvT seems to be quite insane
|
I feel like the question might be formulated too broadly, thus too many things might fit the description? but several good points were already made in the thread.
Attention/micro - early zealots in PvT. Below like ~1800 MMR the outcome is generally very favoured towards Protoss, its almost a free win.
Investment - already mentioned, making a low amount of mutalisks in ZvP. Zerg gains map control, threatens mineral lines, and threatens to snipe HTs. Protoss has to respect all of these and there is no real counter; at best there is an answer.
Strength/flexibility - hydra den builds in ZvP. 973 is IMO the strongest build in the game wherein one player gains initiative and threatens to end the game, but is also able to transition out of it without losing much.
Attention/investment - mines in TvP. Its much harder to clear mines than to lay mines. the outcome is also skewed - for Protoss the best case is to not lose anything to "free" units, while for Terran the upside is almost infinite.
|
Not sure if this qualifies, but maybe adding Dropships in TvZ when going for SK Terran or other bio-heavy build and you are adding a Science Facility? While the facility is coming up you can either make 1 Dropship or 2 if you went 2 Starport (a la SK Terran) and they will finish around the time when you can actually queue vessels? I know that gas can be relatively tight on these builds sometimes but I also think that they can have a huge benefit. Definitely not something we see that often nowadays, though; was definitely more common in the mid-KeSPA era with NaDa and others IIRC.
|
Russian Federation372 Posts
Which strategies in any matchup are low investment and require more investment from the opponent to beat most of the time?
This is the best strategy I think
|
On October 25 2025 05:22 Jealous wrote:
Not sure if this qualifies, but maybe adding Dropships in TvZ when going for SK Terran or other bio-heavy build and you are adding a Science Facility? While the facility is coming up you can either make 1 Dropship or 2 if you went 2 Starport (a la SK Terran) and they will finish around the time when you can actually queue vessels? I know that gas can be relatively tight on these builds sometimes but I also think that they can have a huge benefit. Definitely not something we see that often nowadays, though; was definitely more common in the mid-KeSPA era with NaDa and others IIRC.
You can definitely counterplay around dropships, but they have immense potential.
I think even more annoyingly BCs on maps where you can siege the gas. By the time you clear the BCs with scourge (which get 1 shot) you spent way more gas than the Terran (since you keep getting it denied by the BCs)
and if you have yamato you can just snipe stuff with them and snowball
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://i.postimg.cc/mrygCXyD/image.png)
