|
On August 22 2010 05:09 moosh wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2010 20:26 Cade)Flayer wrote:Seriously... That Zerg in the replay was just beyond awful with his unit control. Keep your units in a ball and attack move, it's not hard. The problem with the Zerg in that game is that every fight he streamed his units in in a big conga line. Embarrassing. Keep your units in a ball and attack move? You don't play Zerg do you...
Dude stop trolling and take some of the advice given to you... The only reason this thread is still going is because people keep coming back to see your retarded responses so what good players are telling youo to do.
I'm 800+ Diamond as Zerg.
Banelings would have worked just fine had you just macrod effectively.
I'm going to say the important part again:
Macro. Effectively.
This means produce units BEFORE you have 2k minerals/ 2k gas at 60 supply.
|
look, there are some issues with ZvT. but saying this is bad for the imba movement. It just makes all us zergs seem like whiners, its gotten to the point where all the talk just needs to stop. the point has been made, hopefully it gets fixed, if not...i understand your frustration but i think T is not the reason for the loss
|
On August 22 2010 06:08 MrBitter wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2010 05:09 moosh wrote:On August 21 2010 20:26 Cade)Flayer wrote:Seriously... That Zerg in the replay was just beyond awful with his unit control. Keep your units in a ball and attack move, it's not hard. The problem with the Zerg in that game is that every fight he streamed his units in in a big conga line. Embarrassing. Keep your units in a ball and attack move? You don't play Zerg do you... Dude stop trolling and take some of the advice given to you... The only reason this thread is still going is because people keep coming back to see your retarded responses so what good players are telling youo to do. I'm 800+ Diamond as Zerg. Banelings would have worked just fine had you just macrod effectively. I'm going to say the important part again: Macro. Effectively. This means produce units BEFORE you have 2k minerals/ 2k gas at 60 supply. I don't intend to troll but in-game it seems you've underestimated your opponent while overestimating yourself.
Something you could've exploited was the fact that he had no raven, so burrowed banelings could have done terrible terrible damage.
But I think Mr.Bitter has discussed everything else there is to discuss.
EDIT: Also this
On August 22 2010 06:09 hEndO wrote: look, there are some issues with ZvT. but saying this is bad for the imba movement. It just makes all us zergs seem like whiners, its gotten to the point where all the talk just needs to stop. the point has been made, hopefully it gets fixed, if not...i understand your frustration but i think T is not the reason for the loss
|
Moosh You have got to be the single most thick skulled person to ASK for advice ever. ALOT of these people are 10x the sc2 player as you and are exactly who you want to listen too. But your arrogance and ignorance won't let you see past your own ego and accept that you sucked in that game you didnt do half of the right things you could have done to turn the game around and you choose losing battle after losing battle instead of picking the right unit comp and striking at the right time. Your a mess and your battle with the rest of the posters on your Thread isnt going to end well for you but make you look as I have described you earlier in this paragraph. Please either A) Stop posting for help your immune to OR B) start accepting facts and people's idea's on how to improve and counter something as SILLY as Marine all in which should have NO CHANCE IN HELL OF WORKING on a half decent zerg.
|
Get a few infestors, Fungal Growth and then RAM your banelings in.
|
This thread:
OP: I just lost to this strat, how do I beat it? TL Posters: Using X, Y, Z tactics OP: OMFG TERRAN IMBALANCE
On August 22 2010 06:13 Meldrath wrote:Marine all in which should have NO CHANCE IN HELL OF WORKING on a half decent zerg.
Just saying, Morrow did just win 3/5 from Dimaga using mostly Marines. So its not like it can never work, but it does require you to actually micro and use other supporting units rather than just 1A with mono-rines.
|
On August 22 2010 05:09 moosh wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2010 20:26 Cade)Flayer wrote:Seriously... That Zerg in the replay was just beyond awful with his unit control. Keep your units in a ball and attack move, it's not hard. The problem with the Zerg in that game is that every fight he streamed his units in in a big conga line. Embarrassing. Keep your units in a ball and attack move? You don't play Zerg do you...
Sorry to point this out, but at your level, if you just macroed more and 1a moved drones as your only army agst marines you probably could have won. I dont think you need to be discussing balance at your level because your basics are so horrid.
You really don't have an excuse for that screenshot. 52/78 with all that resource at 19+ min? you gotta be kidding me.
edit: And I watched your 2nd replay, and it was just as bad. at 1 point you had 4x the drones as your opponent, but far less army and struggling.... despite him not even harassing you. WTF.
|
i wish people would stop using rapidshare and use another site that is actually meant for sc2 replays.
|
On August 22 2010 06:22 SoFFacet wrote:This thread: OP: I just lost to this strat, how do I beat it? TL Posters: Using X, Y, Z tactics OP: OMFG TERRAN IMBALANCE Show nested quote +On August 22 2010 06:13 Meldrath wrote:Marine all in which should have NO CHANCE IN HELL OF WORKING on a half decent zerg.
Just saying, Morrow did just win 3/5 from Dimaga using mostly Marines. So its not like it can never work, but it does require you to actually micro and use other supporting units rather than just 1A with mono-rines. I have yet to see those games so I cannot rebuke your argument as this time. I will say Support and micro allways makes units better and more viable if you noticed in my thread as did others. Point out 100 other things he did poorly or not at all to lose this game. I would like to see what "support" units the marines had as well as how the game unfolded alot of that would have to do with why he would lose to such a strat as well as why Morrow would choose to stay on such low tech units.
|
Someone has already mentioned this and its just so simple and effective--- INFESTERS. Thats the problem with most Zerg players I think, they rarely use infesters in their army composition. (even me but don't worry about that I'm no pro.) Fungal growth- stops the bio ball in its tracks. Neural parasite- steals those medivacs away from the bioball, also making them heal your completely biological army (for a short time.)
Infesters are WAY more cost effective then ultras. For one, its at least a thousand less gas. (cost for upgrading to hive, gas for the ultralisk den, 200 gas per ultra, gas for the armor upgrade, gas for evo chambers, gas for regular army upgrades...) The weird thing? you're going to have an infestation pit anyways if you're teching to ultras. If you have the pit, then why not use it? Oh and having some banelings in the mix too would be good. Can't go wrong with either of these units.
|
Horrible macro, that's all
|
Infestor+baneling really does a number on pure marines. I assume a dozen people already said this but I know that one from experience.
Banelings don't do too much against marines if they can stim and kite but if you get a FG on them it is generally game over.
|
I did take everyones advice? If my macro is bad then I wouldn't play a macro heavy race anymore. So i'm trying Terran. I really think it'd be much easier for me to pick up. Thanks.
User was warned for this post
|
On August 22 2010 06:44 moosh wrote: I did take everyones advice? If my macro is bad then I wouldn't play a macro heavy race anymore. So i'm trying Terran. I really think it'd be much easier for me to pick up. Thanks.
So... in summary... I won't try to improve I'll just do something differnt
|
On August 21 2010 16:38 Sevenofnines wrote:+ Show Spoiler +A few things from the replay. The first thing you need to do is remove the assumption that you outmacroed or outplayed the Terran player, because you did not. Reasons are below.
1. Yes you had more bases, but macro is more than just the number of bases, but also includes how well you are able to spend those resources. There's no use in having a ton of bases if you can't spend your money fast enough, which leads to...
2. A huge excess of larva. What's the point in injecting extra larva if you aren't going to use them. All you are doing is losing out on your naturally occuring larva. If you are short on resources, spend the energy on creep tumors instead. If you have a ton of money, USE UP YOUR LARVA.
3. Your creep spreading was extremely poor. NONE of your 4 bases were connected to each other. Given the length of the game that is inexcusable. Even on that map, you should have at least connected to your natural and probably your 3rd at the gold.
4. Getting supply blocked. You certainly had enough resources to make a ton of Overlords. All you did was limit the size of your army to roughly the same food count as his, and eventually lower than his. And you stayed at that food capacity (~80-90) for pretty much the whole game. I should add that since half of your food was Drones, your actual fighting units was substantially lower than his in nearly EVERY major encounter. So no, its not a surprise you got owned even by "just marines".
For example: A. Battle at his natural ~18:45. Food count is his 68 vs your 78. However you have 39 Drones to his 28 SCV's. So its actually your 39 food army vs his 40, which is dead even. However he had a Bunker, and for some reason you sent all your Banelings to take out his Bunker instead of the mass of marines. Probably would have been better to blow up his marines ball and let the roaches kill the bunker. Poor control on your part because this was certainly a winnable fight.
B. That battle at his natural ~21:46. His food count is 101 vs your 87. However he only has 29 SCV's to your 37 Drones so his actual fighting force is 72 food vs your 50. Advantage him big time. Afterwards you complain about how this was so dumb, but your fate was sealed when you decided to attack an army nearly 50% larger than yours.
C. The final battle. Your 129 food vs. his 134 food; you have 34 Drones to his 19 SCV's, so its actually your 95 food army vs his 115 which is about a 20% advantage for him. Also, your control here was awful as it was a pretty obvious 1A into a larger army. Your units arrived in a line directly into his concave. Nearly all of his marines were firing on you immediately, while your units in the back were still filing up the ramp. If you had balled up first and then moved in, you probably could have won even with his numbers advantage due to your Banelings. But the poor control here cost you.
4. You had HUGE excess resources but had 0/0/0 on upgrades until near the end, while the Terran had +1 attack for most of the game. With the amount of excess you money you had, why not throw down another evo chamber and double upgrade. You probably could have gotten to level 2 upgrades across the board given the length of that game.
In conclusion, you did NOT outmacro or even outplay the Terran player. You just had more bases than him which is only one part of "macro". You didn't even saturate the bases, as I don't think you ever went over 40 Drones. 40 Drones cannot even fully saturate 2 bases, let alone 3 or 4. In essence, you had wasted bases, even more so since you never managed to use the extra larva effectively. He did a better job of spending his money while you let huge reserves build up. He did a better job with upgrades for the majority of the game as you were 0/0/0 for most of the game. He did a better job picking his fights as you constantly attacked into larger armies for the entire game. He did a better job controlling his units and making sure his marines could get a decent concave while you were letting things line up like a firing squad. He did a better job with supply, as you were constantly supply blocked despite the capacity to easily produce to 200 supply worth of overlords. Your creep expansion was non-existant. In other words, your play was worse than his in everything other than making new bases. Bases which you could not take advantage of due to supply block, resource glutting, and no creep.
Bottomline: The right person won that game .
Didn't see you respond to this message. It's pretty much the best answer you got. Not only does it explain why you lost, it also brings out all your false assumptions about your macro and the need for zerg to have multiple tech.
|
is awesome32269 Posts
On August 22 2010 06:44 moosh wrote: I did take everyones advice? If my macro is bad then I wouldn't play a macro heavy race anymore. So i'm trying Terran. I really think it'd be much easier for me to pick up. Thanks.
How stubborn can you be?
What's the difference between pressing 1s zzzzzzzrrrrrrrrrr and pressing 1 aaaaaaaadddddddddd
Hint: NONE. Your macro won't be better because you play Terran, you won't win more games. You are just looking for excuses for your loses.
You avoid every good piece of advice spoon-fed to you by way better players and just aim for the balance comments to cry more? That's both stupid and unrespectful for the people wasting their time typing responses for you.
|
|
|
|