|
Before people start screaming about clones, I've already seen threads about bunker rushes. My question was unanswered in the previous threads, and I'm hoping that people in this thread can provide some useful insight.
I'm not much of a Terran player. Yeah, I've obviously played hundreds of games as Terran in my Starcraft career, but I still don't play Terran very often. In modern times, I'm a Zerg player.
Here's the question that I have: When playing maps on which a zergling-proof wall can be built at the Terran player's ramp (at least when you spawn in the appropriate position), is there any reason not to call bunker rushing a risk-free strategy that should be done every single game?
I've arrived at a logic for this from looking at both the Zerg and Terran players' perspectives.
I will use the following data to support my claim:
(1) Under ideal circumstances on a typical map, the SCV's average mining rate is 68 minerals per minute. (Self-tested in single player, fastest speed, on Python. If my average is a little bit off due to other variables, please tell me.)
(2) Under ideal circumstances on a typical map, the drone's average mining rate is 72 minerals per minute. (Self-tested in single player, fastest speed, on Python. If my average is a little bit off due to other variables, please tell me.)
(3) In the recent game of Jaedong vs. Canata (GAME SPOILERS FROM HERE ON; STOP READING NOW IF YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW THE RESULT), each player spent the following resources in committing to/preventing the bunker rush:
*Jaedong pulled seven drones off of his line when it first began (4:08 into the game).
*Jaedong lost four drones attempting to defend against it.
*Jaedong lost one zergling attempting to defend against it.
*
*Jaedong's three remaining drones returned to mining one minute and four seconds after the bunker rush began.
*Jaedong lost the following minerals:
-Roughly 504 minerals were lost in the seven drones' potential mining time.
-Exactly 200 minerals were lost from the cost of the dead drones.
-Exactly 25 minerals were lost from the cost of the dead zergling.
-Due to the four drones being lost in the bunker rush, and the fact that the game
continued for another two minutes after the surviving drones continued mining, an
additional 576 minerals were lost in the four drones' potential mining time.
TOTAL MINERALS LOST FROM JAEDONG: 1305
*Canata pulled one SCV off of his line when it first began (4:08 into the game).
*That SCV was later killed by a zergling.
*Canata built one bunker in this rush.
*Canata lost a total of three marines in the process of this bunker rush.
*Canata spent the following minerals on the bunker rush:
-Roughly 204 minerals were lost in the one SCV's potential mining time (until the
end of the game).
-Exactly 50 minerals were lost from the cost of the dead SCV.
-Exactly 150 minerals were lost from the cost of the three dead marines.
-Exactly 100 minerals were lost from the cost of the destroyed bunker.
-TOTAL MINERALS LOST FROM CANATA: 504
We are looking at a defecit of 801 minerals for the Zerg player in a game that was just over seven minutes long.
This is obviously one simple example of a game with a bunker rush, and it is clear that dozens of other variables come into play. Here are some of them.
-In another game, the Zerg player may not have lost four drones.
-In another game, the Zerg player may have lost his expansion.
-In another game, the Zerg player may have reached the same or a better result by pulling more or fewer drones from his mineral line.
-In another game, the Zerg player may have opted to go for something like 9 overpool.
-In another game, the Terran player may have not even gotten the bunker up.
-In another game, the Terran player may have not lost any marines (or lost more) in the process of getting the bunker up.
-In another game, the Terran player may have not lost the SCV.
-In another game, the Terran player may have had to send two SCV's to find the Zerg player's spawning location.
....and the list goes on.
Now, I would like to take into consideration a hypothetical example:
In this game, the Zerg pulls eight drones off of his line to defend against the bunker rush. These drones are off of the line for exactly one minute. The Terran player initially sends two SCV's in order to find the Zerg, and begins building the bunker when he reaches the Zerg's base. He sends two marines to the Zerg, and they are killed by the eight drones. The eight drones then kill the SCV, and the Terran player cancels the bunker.
Basically, the Zerg player completely crushes the bunker rush.
Zerg player's losses: one minute of mining time for eight drones.
Terran player's losses: two marines, one SCV, one minute of mining time for the second scouting SCV, and the fee of canceling the bunker:
...in number form...
Zerg player's losses: 576 minerals
Terran player's losses: 243 minerals, plus the mining time of that SCV
This comes to a defecit of 333 minerals for the Zerg player, and the bunker rush failed miserably. Don't get on me about the cost of that mining SCV because it's hard to find bunker rushes that fail as hard as the one above.
Now, here's the last part that I want to throw in. In the event that the Zerg player fends the bunker rush off and the Terran is left with barely anything, the Zerg player often attempts to send zerglings into his base. What is the Zerg player supposed to do if that base allowed for a zergling-free wall? The Terran player can tech to vultures. He can expand early. He doesn't have to rush into getting turrets because the Zerg is behind by 300 minerals. He can take his time and control the game from that point on.
I'd like to ask my question again now. It is important to note that I am not QQing about bunker rushes. I am not calling Terran overpowered. I'm not a crybaby, so I ask that none of you start sobbing all over my thread either. How can I turn a Terran's bunker rush to my favor? Is there ever an instance where it's unprofitable for the Terran to do it?
The only thing I can think of is the Terran can't 14CC (which is greedy as hell to begin with), along with the fact that the economy from 8 raxing isn't as ideal as an economy can be.
|
I play P, so my thoughts on this are entirely theoretical, but I'm guessing that bunker rushing screws up a T's tech worse than it screws up Z's?
|
On July 25 2009 03:44 CaptainPlatypus wrote:
I play P, so my thoughts on this are entirely theoretical, but I'm guessing that bunker rushing screws up a T's tech worse than it screws up Z's?
Not by any stretch of the imagination.
If you check out Jaedong vs. Canata, Canata got vultures out before Jaedong could even get speedlings.
|
And that's the problem with going 12 hatch when you scouted 8rax with your drone.....
+ Show Spoiler +A.k.a. boxer vs yellow semis EVER OSL (for 12 hatch vs 8 rax..)
As a non-zerg player I would assume that 12 pool, overpool, and 9 pool have much less of a problem defending against 8rax... but not totally sure about that. 12 pool might still have some problems, but probably not overpool/9pool.
Basically, if you're greedy you can get owned easily. There's really not much you can do except hope for worse micro from your opponent + micro really well yourself so you don't lose drones. AFAIK if the terran is smart in their follow up with walling/vultures you're basically screwed if you don't defend well off the start.
|
I think this is a very interesting thread.
After watching the vod though, Canata went 8rax, so we need to account for the potential economy lost and minerals forgone compared to a 9 depot, 10-11 rax strategy.
|
Eshlow: The issue is not defending the rush. If you read the 'hypothetical example' section you will see that the OP addresses the situation in which the Bunker Rush is defended, to all extents and purposes, perfectly.
The point he is raising is that even after this perfect defense the Zerg is economically behind, and any possible Zergling advantage is negated by the Terran player's wall. In this situation going for a Pool first build would in fact exacerbate the problems, not reduce them (Even worse economy, even more 'useless' Zerglings.)
|
After watching the vod of the game you mentioned (not disclosing players again for spoiler purposes) a few times, I do not think the Z could have micro'd much better than he did.
But let's be realistic--the Z got unlucky on his scouting and did not see the barracks until almost TOO late to uncommit to the 12-hatch. As eshlow mentioned, 12-pool is already a very shaky defense. By the time Z scouted the barracks, there was not a whole lot the Z could do to prevent the economic damage inevitably done by the bunker rush.
One problem I do have with the OP's analysis:
You only started counting at the moment the T decided to bunker rush from an 8 rax. What about the decision to go 8 rax in the first place? How much economic damage is the T doing to himself relative to the Z by going this BO?
Does that economic sacrifice justify the 333 worst case? The 801 mineral actual-game case? I think you will find that the economic sacrifice of 8 rax vs. 12 hatch is somewhere in between those 2 figures.
Btw: I question the 333 worst case. The 1 minute figure is the result of 2 unsuccessful attempts to crush the bunker rush by the Z and the subsequent interception of reinforcing marines. If, indeed, the bunker rush was successfully "crushed" as you say with no loss the the Z, you will not have the 1:04 mining delay.
|
This is very interesting and i do believe you have a point, but are you saying that the bunker rush was a proxy rax or walk from base? If it is a proxy you will most likely have to build another rax to make that ling-free block. Other than that i guess you have a point, it kind of seems too simple when you put it that way lol. The only problem i see is that you (as the T) would have to macro harder which would allow the bunker rush to be countered easily otherwise you would not take full advantage of the situation.
|
i disagree, despite the points as to minerals lost, it delays the terran players expansion, slowing him down, also, a loss of the rines gives the zerg player temporary map control and more strength unitwise, and, if defended right, I'm pretty sure that the zerg player will come out ahead due to the t will have less when his lair tech comes out as opposed to the t doing a normal fast exp build. a terran stuck at a disadvantage without map control when the zerg has either mutas or lurkers is hard to come back from.
refering to canata vs jaedong game
+ Show Spoiler +I'm pretty sure that Jaedong lost not due to the bunk rush, more to his reaction to the vulture, when he sent his lings past it towards canata's base, allowing the vulture to get up his ramp - if he had delayed with lings, they prolly would have died, but the sunk at his nat could have finished allowing him to repel it from his main, and leaving him in the game.
|
@Newguy:
+ Show Spoiler +I believe he gg'd at the wraith. Zergling counter was only natural, he made a split second decision when he saw the vult to keep going, in hopes that his popping lings could block the ramp in time for the sunken to pop. And anyway that point, he really had no choice but to go for that counter. If he couldn't do any meaningful damage back to Canata, that tech/econ deficit would have been insurmountable.
|
besides not factoring in the minerals lost due to 8-raxing (which are probably pretty signifigant later depot=later scvs=later everything)
There is also a production disadvantage the terran faces from forfeiting map control.
If we take the example where the Zerg crushes the bunker rush and assume they built 8 lings. After those lings the Zerg can just pump drones safely. If the terran fast expands it is more time before they put any pressure on the Zerg, and if they tech to vultures a sunken will easily defend.
Either way I think the Zerg ends up ahead. The instantaneous mineral losses might favor the terran, but the Zerg can easily regain any losses and come out ahead by pumping drones.
EDIT: If that was confusing
what I'm trying to say is that your looking at it the outcome of the rush backwards. Instead of looking at how many minerals each player lost you should look at what they have after the rush.
In your example it might look like this
Zerg: 13 drones, 8 lings, 2 hatcheries with extractor or third hatch coming soon (map control alloing drone production)
Terran(i don't play terran so im not really sure about these): 11 SCVs, 2-3 marines, one rax, CC, gas/second rax building/factory or saved minerals (depending on follow-up).
Looking at it like this I'd say Zerg is ahead.
|
On July 25 2009 04:27 Newguy wrote:i disagree, despite the points as to minerals lost, it delays the terran players expansion, slowing him down, also, a loss of the rines gives the zerg player temporary map control and more strength unitwise, and, if defended right, I'm pretty sure that the zerg player will come out ahead due to the t will have less when his lair tech comes out as opposed to the t doing a normal fast exp build. a terran stuck at a disadvantage without map control when the zerg has either mutas or lurkers is hard to come back from. refering to canata vs jaedong game + Show Spoiler +I'm pretty sure that Jaedong lost not due to the bunk rush, more to his reaction to the vulture, when he sent his lings past it towards canata's base, allowing the vulture to get up his ramp - if he had delayed with lings, they prolly would have died, but the sunk at his nat could have finished allowing him to repel it from his main, and leaving him in the game.
Bunker rush also potentially KILLS zerg expo, forces him to make lings, takes a grip of drones off of mining for a very long time, and potentially kills quite a few drones (and we all know that a zerg losing one drone hurts more than a T or P losing even two or three...especially in the early game).
A T should NOT expo after bunker rushing (unless he kills the hatchery...but even then). That's...not a great idea. It depends on how much damage you do, but the T should continue playing safe or aggressively...an immediate expo doesn't fit in either of those categories.
|
On July 25 2009 04:53 lt.dunbar wrote:
besides not factoring in the minerals lost due to 8-raxing (which are probably pretty signifigant later depot=later scvs=later everything)
There is also a production disadvantage the terran faces from forfeiting map control.
If we take the example where the Zerg crushes the bunker rush and assume they built 8 lings. After those lings the Zerg can just pump drones safely. If the terran fast expands it is more time before they put any pressure on the Zerg, and if they tech to vultures a sunken will easily defend.
Either way I think the Zerg ends up ahead. The instantaneous mineral losses might favor the terran, but the Zerg can easily regain any losses and come out ahead by pumping drones.
EDIT: If that was confusing
what I'm trying to say is that your looking at it the outcome of the rush backwards. Instead of looking at how many minerals each player lost you should look at what they have after the rush.
In your example it might look like this
Zerg: 13 drones, 8 lings, 2 hatcheries with extractor or third hatch coming soon (map control alloing drone production)
Terran(i don't play terran so im not really sure about these): 11 SCVs, 2-3 marines, one rax, CC, gas/second rax building/factory or saved minerals (depending on follow-up).
Looking at it like this I'd say Zerg is ahead.
I think you vastly overestimate the usefulness of those 8 leftover lings. Zerg doesn't need to have zerglings out in earlygame zvt to pump drones. Making zerglings in early zvt sucks, especially with ZvT these days. Bunker rushes almost always get followed up by a vulture, which makes your leftover lings useless.
The fact that zerg can pump drones after the bunker rush is an odd point to make. Terran is going to be making scvs the entire time except for a few exceptions. And idk where you got those numbers, but no zerg is going to come out of a bunker rush with 13 drones and 8 lings unless the rush was a complete failure. It's more realistically going to be something like 10 drones 8 lings. Then you are forced to screw your economy even more by making a sunk to stop the vulture since 8 lings do nothing but delay a vulture for 35 seconds.
|
Our argument is that yes, it forces the zerg to cut economy to defend, but the terran has already cut about an equal amount of economy to get an 8 rax bunker rush in the first place. Bunker rushing with 8 rax is effective versus 12 hatch on close positions, but it's not unstoppable and if it fails to do damage (remember, the example you're basing this on is progamers), you're pretty far behind.
|
zerg will be behind for maybe 2 minutes if he 12 hatched and kept his expo. 2 haches (or 1) can pump drones A LOT faster than 1 cc can, and zerg is free to do it (because T pretty much lost his early force and inevitably zerg will have more lings). If the zerg puts up 1 sunken to block vults, then he is still ahead for quite a while.
edit: turned mins to minutes for clarity 
|
In my original post I noted that there is a certain amount of economic sacrifice made when going 8 rax. I believe that, compared to 14 CC, yes, 8 rax results in a lame economy.
However, while the arguments against my point are good, and while if they're true then I'm absolutely wrong about bunker rushing seeming to be a risk-free strategy, I wouldn't mind seeing some mathematical evidence here. Exactly how much of an effect does going 8 rax have on your economy in the first place? We can't only compare it to 14 CC, but how about other builds? Did you take into consideration the fact that Canata did in fact expand after Jaedong fended the rush off?
Also, I think that you're greatly overestimating the bad effect that this has on the Terran's economy. Everybody seems to believe that the Terran's economy is in shambles after the rush fails, and somebody even suggested that he has fewer SCV's than the Zerg has drones. This is absolutely untrue. The Terran player can easily keep constant production up on the SCV's, and even manage to throw down an expansion before 25 supply.
This continues looking to be like something that very well should be standard. Hell, I'm even thinking that fake bunker rushing, just to pull 7-8 drones off of the line for 30 seconds, would be a great idea.
|
I think your post should have a spoiler alert in the title....once someone is already reading a post on bunker rushing.....and then you mention a game, you already spoiled it for then. Even though you didn't tell them the results, you told them how the game is gonna play out.
|
I actually did some testing on this awhile ago
At the 3 minute mark:
8rax, 9depot, 15depot, with 2 SCVs sent out as soon as rax finishes
12SCVs mining, 2 SCVs rushing, 1538 minerals mined
9depot, 11rax, 16depot, 18CC, with SCV scout sent at 12 supply
16 SCVs mining, 1 SCV scouting, 1656 minerals mined
So the terran actually cuts 3 scvs just to do 8rax/9depot
|
8 Lings could really delay the vulture from attacking your base or even manage to kill it. If you have 8 Lings, he just can't leave his base with a wall-in and no units to defend. You have the threat to destroy or for him to pull scv's just to repair.
|
You're not really counting it right imo
Instead of doing what you did you should see what each player has after the bunker rush.
the zerg : 2 hatcherys, pool, X drones, gas?, X overlords, X zerglings, etc
the terran: 1 CC, 1barracks, gas(if meching), X SCVs, Xmarines
Then, you compare it to if the bunker rush had not happened and the terran went 10rax -> FE and you can see the effects of the bunker rush
If you have good micro/get lucky/your opponent sucks you can hold off bunker rushes without suffering any casualties
Bunker rushes are a part of the game, sometimes starcraft is like rock paper scissors it can't be helped. You should be enjoying the game instead of whining about minor imbalances.
|
I agree with a lot of the OP; bunker rushing can really mess with the Zerg even if he defends it well. What I do a lot though, is start a bunker if the Zerg 12hatched when I went 1rax FE if I scouted him first. He can't tell whether it's a tarp or not so he usually pulls like 3-7 drones to kill it off even if I keep my marines at my base. I usually send my first marine towards his base anyway, incase he doesn't overreact and pull drones and finish the bunker and put the marine in. If my marine is still kinda far from my bunker and he's going to kill it(or the SCV) before it gets there I just cancel at the last second and send the marine back with enough time to defend from the lings following.
|
On July 25 2009 14:29 tobi9999 wrote:
You're not really counting it right imo
Instead of doing what you did you should see what each player has after the bunker rush.
the zerg : 2 hatcherys, pool, X drones, gas?, X overlords, X zerglings, etc
the terran: 1 CC, 1barracks, gas(if meching), X SCVs, Xmarines
Then, you compare it to if the bunker rush had not happened and the terran went 10rax -> FE and you can see the effects of the bunker rush
If you have good micro/get lucky/your opponent sucks you can hold off bunker rushes without suffering any casualties
Bunker rushes are a part of the game, sometimes starcraft is like rock paper scissors it can't be helped. You should be enjoying the game instead of whining about minor imbalances.
Are you illiterate?
You constructed a post in what seems to be English, but your reading comprehension skills are obviously severely limited.
http://tutoring.sylvanlearning.com/
|
I don't think you can compare minerals directly between zerg and terran. i.e. 300 minerals for zerg =/= 300 minerals for terran. Aside from that, i think its important to take into consideration the base distances and more importantly zerg BO. If the zerg 9pools or overpools they can usually defend against a bunker rush without needing to pull any drones, especially if rush distances are long. In that case, I think the zerg player is definitely ahead.
You also suggest there is no possibility of a counterattack by lings if the terran can make a ling proof wall. But thats only true if the terran doesn't proxy rax and builds the rax as part of his lingproof wall. Now if the rush distances are long, making the rax at the base might not even be viable and then a counterattack by lings still works if he proxy rax's instead. Also you have to see if the rines spawn outside the wall or inside the wall (very important actually). If there is only 1 rine behind the wall, an all-in ling attack will still own 5 scvs trying to repair if the space allows for enough lings.
The only example you seem to be using is 12hatch vs. 8rax bunker rush which is obviously a BO advantage for terran, and there is no possible way to 8rax knowing a zerg is 12hatching first. also the jaedong vs canata game... jaedong 12hatched before scouting the 8rax unlike what most people seem to think. his drone arrived like a sec after the hatch was built if you look at the minimap.
Anyway, as a C+ zerg, I always feel ahead if i defend well against a bunker rush, even if I can't counter. It's also rare that a ling proof wall can be made so that both the nat and main are covered so the terran is limited to one base if you are aggressive enough even if they planned to fe. Bunker rush really isn't that much of a commitment for terran, but i still wouldn't call if risk-free especially since i don't think there is a map with short rush distances that lets a terran perfectly wall off his nat and main. even then you can still pressure the buildings and pick off the scv making the 2nd depot.
Are you illiterate? You constructed a post in what seems to be English, but your reading comprehension skills are obviously severely limited. http://tutoring.sylvanlearning.com/
edit: you are also an asshole
|
I agree with ilovelosses, defending a bunker rush isn't as hard as its made out to be as long as you pull the drones early and are able to intercept the marines...
But going back to the OP's points assuming a best case scenario where the zerg lost only one drone and 2-3 lings in breaking the rush, I feel that the game would be very much in favor of the zerg because he has this window where he can expect no pressure of any sort from the Terran and can make drones safely, transitioning his opening into two hatch lair or even 3 hatch, and with overlord scouting can see pretty much what the terran is up to, and react appropriately
On the terran side you have no idea what the zerg is making, is it two hatch muta? Lurker/hydra push to break the wall? Unless the terran makes an academy and is able to scan the zerg tech he's gonna be playing blind without any way to capitalize if the zerg skimped on base defenses, and even if he does make a build with an academy in it, the zerg should be able to spot it or the lack of factory and use the optimal build to counter the terran tech.
In the particular game you pointed out between Jaedong and Canata, I would say that was more the exception rather than the rule as long as the zerg scouts the bunker rush in time to quash it without losing more than a drone or two. The vulture getting into the main was just Canata's icing on the cake.
|
On July 25 2009 15:10 Raidy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2009 14:29 tobi9999 wrote:
You're not really counting it right imo
Instead of doing what you did you should see what each player has after the bunker rush.
the zerg : 2 hatcherys, pool, X drones, gas?, X overlords, X zerglings, etc
the terran: 1 CC, 1barracks, gas(if meching), X SCVs, Xmarines
Then, you compare it to if the bunker rush had not happened and the terran went 10rax -> FE and you can see the effects of the bunker rush
If you have good micro/get lucky/your opponent sucks you can hold off bunker rushes without suffering any casualties
Bunker rushes are a part of the game, sometimes starcraft is like rock paper scissors it can't be helped. You should be enjoying the game instead of whining about minor imbalances.
Are you illiterate? You constructed a post in what seems to be English, but your reading comprehension skills are obviously severely limited. http://tutoring.sylvanlearning.com/
Don't start the flame war; just clarify ur post for confused readers. Sometimes the info throws people off.
Tobi, he's just saying that the zerg loses more minerals than the terran in the event of a bunk rush, regardless of it's success. You can assume he's comparing the losses to the norm.
On topic...
The loss in minerals is compensated by the fact zergs can pump drones like nothing. The trick is to scout, anticipate the terran's move, and to react accordingly. Zergs only need about 30-35 drones to reach their macro capacity for 3 hatches; coupled with the fact that zergs can make drones really fast, the mineral loss should be nothing if you react to his follow up correctly.
The terran loses flexibility and becomes very predictable; it's all a matter of how long they can stall the zerg so that they will not have time to counter their tech.
|
Just don't 12 hatch... its just like saying=> U,U but 14cc is almost always autolosse or big advantage for Zerg if they do 9pool/overpool....Thats why terran doesn't 14cc that much...
|
Some of the responses in this topic have me baffled.
The OP doesn't want your strategies for fending off bunkers rushes.
How many times does someone have to tell you guys before you read and understand?
I hate people who flame in topic like this, but I'm seriously considering giving the guy who linked sylvanlearning.com a Nobel Prize, in this case it's very true.
Topic at hand:
I did catch the game which was mentioned earlier and I think the way the zerg dealt/excellent micro from the terran was the real issue. I think your calculations, while interesting, are not accurate to how each side of the rush are doing. At the pro level, I think I've seen too many zerg players get bunker rushed, turn it away, and then get map control and crush the terran.
Now a fake bunker rush, as you proposed, would be much more interesting, and I think I've seen a few pro games where the terran player kind of feigns the rush, or doesn't dedicate much to it, just to get the zerg off mining.
|
On July 25 2009 17:13 checo wrote:
Just don't 12 hatch... its just like saying=> U,U but 14cc is almost always autolosse or big advantage for Zerg if they do 9pool/overpool....Thats why terran doesn't 14cc that much...
You don't play a lot of zvt, do you?
I think that bunker rushing is favorable at the moment due to the influx of 3/2 player maps. As progamers do not in fact bunker rush every game, or even a majority of the time, there are clearly some flaws in the build. If your bunker rush totally fails, you'll end up with less money at the critical point at which mutalisks come out from a 2hat muta build to kill you. As such, you really have to inflict damage, or you will probably die to the mutalisks when they come out.
|
(1) For those of you who didn't notice when I linked the guy to the Sylvan Learning Center website, he claimed I was whining about bunker rushes. I specifically stated the purpose of this thread in my first post, and actually requested that nobody use words like "overpowered."
Am I an asshole? Yes. Was I being an asshole? No, not until I was provoked.
(2) By saying that 8 rax is a BO counter to 12 hatch, you're agreeing that yes, in practically every ZvT game, the Terran should 8 rax. I don't know if you've noticed, but 12 hatch is pretty much the only thing done on almost every map nowadays, especially at the amateur level. 9 overpool puts you behind due to Terran ramp blocking (even with SCV/rines/floated barracks) and the fact that zerglings alone are soon made useless by one of several Terran units; it's a pretty horrible idea to go 9 overpool considering a Terran can defend against it while still going a FE build.
(3) By the time a Zerg player scouts a Terran, the Terran can easily have marines being made from his 8 rax, and the Zerg can easily be put in an awkward position of an expansion hatchery being put up.
(4) I really appreciate the people who understood the purpose of this thread and gave valuable insight. The big idea seems to be with map control and how Zerg players can make up for lost mining time by expanding and taking an early economic advantage. Calculations are important in Starcraft, but there are far too many variables to base strategies on them alone.
(5) I still find that bunker rushing at the amateur level, or at least feigning a bunker rush, is an incredibly deadly strategy. Zerg players panic when they see the SCV start building a bunker. It's a "holy shit" moment. Some overreact. Some don't react well at all. I, from the perspective of a Zerg player, recommend that Terran players use this knowledge to their advantage.
|
On July 25 2009 19:14 Raidy wrote:
(1) For those of you who didn't notice when I linked the guy to the Sylvan Learning Center website, he claimed I was whining about bunker rushes. I specifically stated the purpose of this thread in my first post, and actually requested that nobody use words like "overpowered."
Am I an asshole? Yes. Was I being an asshole? No, not until I was provoked.
(2) By saying that 8 rax is a BO counter to 12 hatch, you're agreeing that yes, in practically every ZvT game, the Terran should 8 rax. I don't know if you've noticed, but 12 hatch is pretty much the only thing done on almost every map nowadays, especially at the amateur level. 9 overpool puts you behind due to Terran ramp blocking (even with SCV/rines/floated barracks) and the fact that zerglings alone are soon made useless by one of several Terran units; it's a pretty horrible idea to go 9 overpool considering a Terran can defend against it while still going a FE build.
(3) By the time a Zerg player scouts a Terran, the Terran can easily have marines being made from his 8 rax, and the Zerg can easily be put in an awkward position of an expansion hatchery being put up.
(4) I really appreciate the people who understood the purpose of this thread and gave valuable insight. The big idea seems to be with map control and how Zerg players can make up for lost mining time by expanding and taking an early economic advantage. Calculations are important in Starcraft, but there are far too many variables to base strategies on them alone.
(5) I still find that bunker rushing at the amateur level, or at least feigning a bunker rush, is an incredibly deadly strategy. Zerg players panic when they see the SCV start building a bunker. It's a "holy shit" moment. Some overreact. Some don't react well at all. I, from the perspective of a Zerg player, recommend that Terran players use this knowledge to their advantage.
tl;dr, stop trying so hard to prove that you're right and make a concise argument instead.
8 rax isn't a BO counter to 12 hatch, it's just the one that puts the most pressure on early. 12 hatch has no BO counter in ZvT. That's like trying to find a counter to 2 rax. You can't.
|
Osaka27154 Posts
On July 25 2009 18:29 Rakanishu2 wrote:
Some of the responses in this topic have me baffled.
The OP doesn't want your strategies for fending off bunkers rushes.
How many times does someone have to tell you guys before you read and understand?
I hate people who flame in topic like this, but I'm seriously considering giving the guy who linked sylvanlearning.com a Nobel Prize, in this case it's very true.
Then he should label this as a guide, rather than a question. There is no call for being an asshole in the thread, especially if you are the one that created it.
I like this topic, it is interesting, but keep it mannered.
|
United States2186 Posts
Even semi failed bunker rushes can be a problem because the Terran gets behind in tech. Look what happens here:
http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/games/14295_Flash_vs_Jaedong
Jaedong might have lost more money overall but he was able to start his tech asap and his mutas came relatively faster than normal. Flash did do an offbeat build which was a large part of the loss as it requires more precise timings but the same problem still applies. If he bunker rushes, his tech/defense is slower. However, the bunker rush doesn't have to slow your tech at all.
So basically you need to not delay your spire a second. If you stop the bunker rush cold you can regain any mineral loss by making less lings and getting mutas out relatively faster.
btw 2 rax has a counter: 3 hatch muta. That's why it's dead.
|
On July 25 2009 19:36 Manifesto7 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2009 18:29 Rakanishu2 wrote:
Some of the responses in this topic have me baffled.
The OP doesn't want your strategies for fending off bunkers rushes.
How many times does someone have to tell you guys before you read and understand?
I hate people who flame in topic like this, but I'm seriously considering giving the guy who linked sylvanlearning.com a Nobel Prize, in this case it's very true. Then he should label this as a guide, rather than a question. There is no call for being an asshole in the thread, especially if you are the one that created it. I like this topic, it is interesting, but keep it mannered.
I don't understand, he's still asking a question, I'm confused as to why his question would be put into a guide category.
His question is "Why don't terran just bunker rush/fake bunker rush every game?" His conjecture is that it always ends up with the terran being better off economically even in an ideal counter. Which I disagree with, but that's not what's important, whats important is that its still a question, and a decent one at that.
What do you lose by fake bunker rushing? possibly 1 SCV mine time+bunker cancellation cost. The zerg either has to scout that its a fake, or play it safe and consider it a bunker rush and attempt to stop it.
I'm no expert, I'd love it if someone could shed some more light on the topic.
|
Osaka27154 Posts
If that is his question, then he should carefully consider the strategies used to fend off bunker rushes, as that will be a determining factor whether or not it is worth doing.
|
Would it matter if you scout him last?
|
I would like to know exactly how you found this:
SCV's average mining rate = 68 mins/min
Drone's average mining rate = 72 mins/min
I'm just curious, because I don't see why there is any reason an SCV should mine slower than a drone. As far as I know all peons have exactly the same specs (Except SCV HP).
|
They say that probes mine faster.
|
On July 26 2009 11:02 For_The_Swarm wrote:
I would like to know exactly how you found this:
SCV's average mining rate = 68 mins/min
Drone's average mining rate = 72 mins/min
I'm just curious, because I don't see why there is any reason an SCV should mine slower than a drone. As far as I know all peons have exactly the same specs (Except SCV HP).
Probes accelerate fastest although they all have the same top speed.
|
On July 26 2009 11:02 For_The_Swarm wrote:
I would like to know exactly how you found this:
SCV's average mining rate = 68 mins/min
Drone's average mining rate = 72 mins/min
I'm just curious, because I don't see why there is any reason an SCV should mine slower than a drone. As far as I know all peons have exactly the same specs (Except SCV HP).
IIRC, there was a thread on it, but i can't seem to find it.
Probes mine the fastest, then drones and then SCVs
edit: found one
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=93124
but i remember there was another one that tested it and went into detail... which apparently disappeared into theabyss
|
The stats in OP is wrong. It hasn't taken into account that you need to cut scv's to use 8 rax. That's really a big factor as the game goes on.
|
Even a fake bunker rush will put T ahead of Z. Why? Standard Z response is pulling 6~8 drones against 2 scvs, 2 marines. Those 6 drones not mining (one mines 8 so 48 minerals) causes minerals to be lost while T only loses minerals from canceling the bunker (25 mineral)
8 rax is hardly what you call an econ loss. Have you seen what a failed 4 pool does to Z's economy? A failed bunker rush 8 rax, you still have a ton of SCVs and you can just transition it up to Mech easily. The OP was hesititant to use the word overpowered but I will gladly use the word overpowered for T in TvZ. Not just because of bunker rushes but because of how flexible T is in that matchup and the many variations in opening that forces Z to adapt, and how much Z gets punished for a failed strategy while it is not vice versa for T.
|
On July 26 2009 13:14 AzureEye wrote:
Even a fake bunker rush will put T ahead of Z. Why? Standard Z response is pulling 6~8 drones against 2 scvs, 2 marines. Those 6 drones not mining (one mines 8 so 48 minerals) causes minerals to be lost while T only loses minerals from canceling the bunker (25 mineral)
8 rax is hardly what you call an econ loss. Have you seen what a failed 4 pool does to Z's economy? A failed bunker rush 8 rax, you still have a ton of SCVs and you can just transition it up to Mech easily. The OP was hesititant to use the word overpowered but I will gladly use the word overpowered for T in TvZ. Not just because of bunker rushes but because of how flexible T is in that matchup and the many variations in opening that forces Z to adapt, and how much Z gets punished for a failed strategy while it is not vice versa for T.
Don't compare 4pool with 8 rax. It ain't the same. 8 rax is more of 9pool w/o gas. You could fake a bunker rush if Z hadn't scouted your base and assumed that you did 8 rax but in reality, you did 11 rax.
|
On July 26 2009 13:14 AzureEye wrote:
Even a fake bunker rush will put T ahead of Z. Why? Standard Z response is pulling 6~8 drones against 2 scvs, 2 marines. Those 6 drones not mining (one mines 8 so 48 minerals) causes minerals to be lost while T only loses minerals from canceling the bunker (25 mineral)
8 rax is hardly what you call an econ loss. Have you seen what a failed 4 pool does to Z's economy? A failed bunker rush 8 rax, you still have a ton of SCVs and you can just transition it up to Mech easily. The OP was hesititant to use the word overpowered but I will gladly use the word overpowered for T in TvZ. Not just because of bunker rushes but because of how flexible T is in that matchup and the many variations in opening that forces Z to adapt, and how much Z gets punished for a failed strategy while it is not vice versa for T.
Terran loses more than that simply through not doing the best economic opening against 12 hatch which is 15CC at nat 15depot with minimal marines produced.
You only have to look at the 8rax into mech build order from Stylish' thread + Show Spoiler +8 barrack
9 suply
11 gas
16 fact
16 fact
16 suply
22 suply
29 suply
30 armory
35 suply
35 Ebay
|
On July 26 2009 13:39 Batibot323 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2009 13:14 AzureEye wrote:
Even a fake bunker rush will put T ahead of Z. Why? Standard Z response is pulling 6~8 drones against 2 scvs, 2 marines. Those 6 drones not mining (one mines 8 so 48 minerals) causes minerals to be lost while T only loses minerals from canceling the bunker (25 mineral)
8 rax is hardly what you call an econ loss. Have you seen what a failed 4 pool does to Z's economy? A failed bunker rush 8 rax, you still have a ton of SCVs and you can just transition it up to Mech easily. The OP was hesititant to use the word overpowered but I will gladly use the word overpowered for T in TvZ. Not just because of bunker rushes but because of how flexible T is in that matchup and the many variations in opening that forces Z to adapt, and how much Z gets punished for a failed strategy while it is not vice versa for T. Don't compare 4pool with 8 rax. It ain't the same. 8 rax is more of 9pool w/o gas. You could fake a bunker rush if Z hadn't scouted your base and assumed that you did 8 rax but in reality, you did 11 rax.
Well there is no reason not to compare. 4 pool is early ling production and 8 rax is early marine production. But because of the larvae system, Zerg can't produce workers while making units like T can. However, one leaves the economy completely devastated while the other leaves the economy slightly worse
|
On July 26 2009 13:42 Dreadwave wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2009 13:14 AzureEye wrote:
Even a fake bunker rush will put T ahead of Z. Why? Standard Z response is pulling 6~8 drones against 2 scvs, 2 marines. Those 6 drones not mining (one mines 8 so 48 minerals) causes minerals to be lost while T only loses minerals from canceling the bunker (25 mineral)
8 rax is hardly what you call an econ loss. Have you seen what a failed 4 pool does to Z's economy? A failed bunker rush 8 rax, you still have a ton of SCVs and you can just transition it up to Mech easily. The OP was hesititant to use the word overpowered but I will gladly use the word overpowered for T in TvZ. Not just because of bunker rushes but because of how flexible T is in that matchup and the many variations in opening that forces Z to adapt, and how much Z gets punished for a failed strategy while it is not vice versa for T. Terran loses more than that simply through not doing the best economic opening against 12 hatch which is 15CC at nat 15depot with minimal marines produced. You only have to look at the 8rax into mech build order from Stylish' thread + Show Spoiler +8 barrack
9 suply
11 gas
16 fact
16 fact
16 suply
22 suply
29 suply
30 armory
35 suply
35 Ebay to see how much SCVs Terran is cutting(2 facs before 2nd depot).
Well this is assuming that T's failed rush didn't catch any drones (unlikely but possible)
T is the only race that can afford to play greedy without fear of getting punished because they have a wall at nat that they can convientiently protect by a rigged ability called repair
The "standard" 1 Fact CC fast expo actually puts you ahead of 12 hatch because T is running on 2 bases while Z is running on 2 bases. Just because you didn't play "standard" doesn't mean your econ is shitty, 8 rax still gives you decent econ to compete against 12 hatch
|
On July 26 2009 13:52 AzureEye wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2009 13:39 Batibot323 wrote:On July 26 2009 13:14 AzureEye wrote:
Even a fake bunker rush will put T ahead of Z. Why? Standard Z response is pulling 6~8 drones against 2 scvs, 2 marines. Those 6 drones not mining (one mines 8 so 48 minerals) causes minerals to be lost while T only loses minerals from canceling the bunker (25 mineral)
8 rax is hardly what you call an econ loss. Have you seen what a failed 4 pool does to Z's economy? A failed bunker rush 8 rax, you still have a ton of SCVs and you can just transition it up to Mech easily. The OP was hesititant to use the word overpowered but I will gladly use the word overpowered for T in TvZ. Not just because of bunker rushes but because of how flexible T is in that matchup and the many variations in opening that forces Z to adapt, and how much Z gets punished for a failed strategy while it is not vice versa for T. Don't compare 4pool with 8 rax. It ain't the same. 8 rax is more of 9pool w/o gas. You could fake a bunker rush if Z hadn't scouted your base and assumed that you did 8 rax but in reality, you did 11 rax. Well there is no reason not to compare. 4 pool is early ling production and 8 rax is early marine production. But because of the larvae system, Zerg can't produce workers while making units like T can. However, one leaves the economy completely devastated while the other leaves the economy slightly worse
They don't compare, 8rax is closer to 9pool, both buy you safety against early game aggression and you can be offensive if they cut too many corners but if they don't you are behind.
Terran can also do 4pool, you need to do a lot of damage for it to be worth it, if it doesn't you die, see Strelok vs F91 on blue storm in Liquibition.
If you don't want to deal with bunkerrushes you can always use overpool 11 expo, the hatchery timing is very close to that of 12 hatch(~5 seconds slower) but you will have a weaker economy and lings are ~15 seconds later than if you 9 pooled. If they don't go into your main first you can sometimes win the game outright because it looks so similar to 12 hatch unlike a 9 pool. It's still better to just learn how to deal with bunkers with 12 hatch, but if you just know your opponent is going to bunkerrush it can be hilariously effective.
|
On July 26 2009 13:52 AzureEye wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2009 13:39 Batibot323 wrote:On July 26 2009 13:14 AzureEye wrote:
Even a fake bunker rush will put T ahead of Z. Why? Standard Z response is pulling 6~8 drones against 2 scvs, 2 marines. Those 6 drones not mining (one mines 8 so 48 minerals) causes minerals to be lost while T only loses minerals from canceling the bunker (25 mineral)
8 rax is hardly what you call an econ loss. Have you seen what a failed 4 pool does to Z's economy? A failed bunker rush 8 rax, you still have a ton of SCVs and you can just transition it up to Mech easily. The OP was hesititant to use the word overpowered but I will gladly use the word overpowered for T in TvZ. Not just because of bunker rushes but because of how flexible T is in that matchup and the many variations in opening that forces Z to adapt, and how much Z gets punished for a failed strategy while it is not vice versa for T. Don't compare 4pool with 8 rax. It ain't the same. 8 rax is more of 9pool w/o gas. You could fake a bunker rush if Z hadn't scouted your base and assumed that you did 8 rax but in reality, you did 11 rax. Well there is no reason not to compare. 4 pool is early ling production and 8 rax is early marine production. But because of the larvae system, Zerg can't produce workers while making units like T can. However, one leaves the economy completely devastated while the other leaves the economy slightly worse
Compare 8 rax with 9pool, okay?
|
On July 26 2009 13:57 AzureEye wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2009 13:42 Dreadwave wrote:On July 26 2009 13:14 AzureEye wrote:
Even a fake bunker rush will put T ahead of Z. Why? Standard Z response is pulling 6~8 drones against 2 scvs, 2 marines. Those 6 drones not mining (one mines 8 so 48 minerals) causes minerals to be lost while T only loses minerals from canceling the bunker (25 mineral)
8 rax is hardly what you call an econ loss. Have you seen what a failed 4 pool does to Z's economy? A failed bunker rush 8 rax, you still have a ton of SCVs and you can just transition it up to Mech easily. The OP was hesititant to use the word overpowered but I will gladly use the word overpowered for T in TvZ. Not just because of bunker rushes but because of how flexible T is in that matchup and the many variations in opening that forces Z to adapt, and how much Z gets punished for a failed strategy while it is not vice versa for T. Terran loses more than that simply through not doing the best economic opening against 12 hatch which is 15CC at nat 15depot with minimal marines produced. You only have to look at the 8rax into mech build order from Stylish' thread + Show Spoiler +8 barrack
9 suply
11 gas
16 fact
16 fact
16 suply
22 suply
29 suply
30 armory
35 suply
35 Ebay to see how much SCVs Terran is cutting(2 facs before 2nd depot). Well this is assuming that T's failed rush didn't catch any drones (unlikely but possible) T is the only race that can afford to play greedy without fear of getting punished because they have a wall at nat that they can convientiently protect by a rigged ability called repair The "standard" 1 Fact CC fast expo actually puts you ahead of 12 hatch because T is running on 2 bases while Z is running on 2 bases. Just because you didn't play "standard" doesn't mean your econ is shitty, 8 rax still gives you decent econ to compete against 12 hatch
You know why Z has to pull 6~8 drones because he's supposed to defend the rush for good. He's supposed not to lose drones when he pulls 6~8 drones vs 2 rines/1~2 scv. When your rush failed, you have less or equal scv's mining than his drones but you got less scv's compared to a standard. This rigged ability you called repair, takes off an scv/scvs from mining and costs resources. If you already played with a lower-econ, it'd hurt you more repairing than repairing with a higher econ build.
|
About a recent game+ Show Spoiler + Jaedong vs Canata Game 4. Canata bunker rushes again. Jaedong defends it. Seemed to me Canata came out with a much better economy.
This thread makes me think 12 hatch isn't a safe build anymore.
Also... I lost to a bunker rush today : (
|
On July 30 2009 19:59 roronoe wrote:About a recent game + Show Spoiler + Jaedong vs Canata Game 4. Canata bunker rushes again. Jaedong defends it. Seemed to me Canata came out with a much better economy.
This thread makes me think 12 hatch isn't a safe build anymore.
Also... I lost to a bunker rush today : (
It's all about how well you defend it, if you defend well then you have superior economy, if you lose a lot of drones or your hatch then you don't.
|
As in other strategy games, focus on what is ON the table/board/field instead of what has LEFT the table/board/field.
"Z has x minerals" instead of "Z lost mining time"
"Terran has y minerals" instead of "T lost minerals by canceling the bunker"
"Z has 11 drones" instead of "Z lost a drone"
What leaves the play area does not matter; what matters is the material that remains.
|
As a terran user I can vouch for the power of bunker rushing, or even a fake bunker rush. I would tell zerg users to pay particular attention on 2 player maps / small maps. Don't rely elusively on the OV to scout and try to develop a sense for proxi's / early buildings. Watch the timing of the barracks, it can be built on 8/10 supply (a BIG red flag), 10 supply, or 11 supply, or proxi'd.
Yes it blows to send out a drone to scout, but it's a double edged sword...if terran goes 11 rax (econ) and doesn't scout, a 4-pool or speedling rush can really be devastating also.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
