EPTZerg MACRO against T & P - Page 5
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Samhax
1054 Posts
| ||
|
Killerbot
United States106 Posts
I love how much this has become like WoW, whining about patches and balancing, about classes(races) being overpowered and underpowered, about how compared to vanilla(Brood War) it's not the same. If you want identical races go play Supreme Commander or some shit, play Starcraft 2 for the strategy, the requirement that you keep up with macro, and for having to scout so you know what you're opponent is doing so you can counter it. You're acting like a Zerg can instantly go from having 50 hydras to having 100 mutas, guess what, they can't. It takes time for the switch from spire building to mutas building to having enough resources etc... And yes if you let a Zerg get 4 or 5 bases while staying on 2 you deserve to lose, simply because they out resource you like crazy. | ||
|
PanzerKing
United States483 Posts
On October 20 2010 23:27 hugman wrote: Look at how well qxc did vs IdrA in three games, non of which were very short. It's way too early too call out late game inbalance I don't think he did particularly well, given that they're both very talented players. The first game was over well before Idra decided to end it, he just played conservatively, which is perfectly reasonable when money is on the line. In the second, he left when he arguably had a chance of winning, bu he'd decided he didn't want to play it out. The third game was also over well before Idra moved in for the kill, when he easily wiped out QXC's army in one pitched battle and QXC had no chance to catch up in macro. | ||
|
AmstAff
Germany949 Posts
They went for FE, didn't scouted and just made drones and got rolled by an push (THE COUNTER TO EXPO + DRONE ONLY) now they FE and can't be bunkerrushed or harassed and pushes get destroyed because of the better economy and +1 range roach and I always said that lategame Zerg is unbeatable if they go EVEN (isnt it ridiculous that you have to be ahead to get a fair game?) into the mid- lategame because larvainject is way too strong. Zerg has the army which takes the last amount of skill, they only use 1 spellcaster/ability in most of the fights /infestor) and dont have the bonus damage shit and P/T units need more micro (hellion/tank focus fire, bio ball stim and micro / P has to make use of the hardcounterunits to focus the right shit + storm + sentry + even phoenix need micro in a fight against mutas) and finally Zerg has like 3 buildings (+ tech to get the units) for their macro management. You cant give a race a safe early game, an easy usable A move army (and with autosurround and no overkill/selfsplashing banelings it is an a move army unless you a move into a chokepoint), and the easiest macro in combination with the most effective macro. Zergs were crying they are going to switch over to Terran but they didnt, but after days the first switched from Terran to Zerg isn't this proof enough? If I wouldnt have played Terran since sc1 I would change too, damn I even changed from sc2 P to sc2 T because PvZ during beta was totally broken with the 1 supply roach and the funny a move, after a move from Zerg in the lategame. HOPEFULLY all the zergs will enjoy their freewins over the next weeks and finally realize that a BALANCED game with even games will make more fun even IF you lose against a better player! Finally the only thing that stops zerg from total domination are the maps (which are indeed anti-zerg) but imagine bigger maps with longer pushtimings, more expansions and wide areas to surround... I think it will be mostly impossible to win a game. | ||
|
gREIFOCs
Argentina208 Posts
On October 20 2010 21:31 TeWy wrote: Judging at some of the posts I've recently read on TL, it seems that people are slowly starting to figure out that late game SC2 Zerg has no counter. No? Ultras die to thors, immortals and stimmed marauders with ease. They are actually just terrible against immortals. Broodlords are slow, weak and depend on their range and positioning to be effective. All pro gamers that go broodlords end up loosing some of them, even if the battle is leaning in favour of zerg. Please, explain me, what part of zerg late game "has no counter" as ultras and broodlords can be nullified with the choices that terran and protoss has. Even more, zerg late game, doesn't have a SINGLE UNIT that shoots up. You have to depend on corruptors or hydras which are tier 2 units. So, reading that someone thinks that zerg lategame is imba, when a single BC owns every single tier 3 zerg unit, is strange. | ||
|
Jermstuddog
United States2231 Posts
On October 20 2010 23:25 Sadist wrote: Roaches absolutely rape marines, what the hell are you talking about + they are decent vs thors. Stuff like this just shows how little those arguing the Terran point actually pay attention to the TvZ matchup. Roaches MIGHT break even or barely ahead against Marines and Thors if they start the fight in favorable terrain. If you flip this around and give the Terran favorable grounds, they will obliterate the Roaches. I would also like to point out, I am not saying that Zerg macro isn't strong, but it isn't nearly as unstoppable as some people try to make it out to be. The situation has gotten better to the point where it is feasible that I don't lose 50% of my games right off the bat as a Zerg player because everything is stacked against me. A FE is how Zerg builds his base, and now I can finally build my base in a normal way most games. We are now on equal footing with Protoss and Terran. Yes, drones do need to be harassed. Just like probes and SCVs need to be harassed. SC2 is an economic battle, he who kills the most workers usually wins. Zerg macro is strong because the Zerg army is terrible. Things are getting more balanced. | ||
|
Bull-Demon
United States582 Posts
On October 20 2010 23:28 PanzerKing wrote: Nobody is saying that. What we are saying is that a 200/200 mech army can be beaten by, or at worst, traded for a 200/200 Z army that is micro'd properly. When that happens, T loses the game. So think of ways to prevent that from happening. If the zerg has the resources to just replenish his army instantly, the game was decided long before the maxed army battle. Edit: Adding this in. I just find it absolutely insane how its been less than a week since this patch landed, and within a day terran were already calling for nerfs saying the MU had been borked. This was after almost three months of zerg players being told to "maybe try nydus/drops?". Give it some time, the first week you should be brainstorming for new strategies not complaining on the forums. In a month if the top 200 is half zerg and they are winning every tourney, then we'll talk. Until then give it a rest. | ||
|
Sadist
United States7227 Posts
On October 20 2010 23:33 Killerbot wrote: And so what if roaches rape marines, all it takes is a 50/50 investment and you can produce marauders one of the best ground vs ground units in the game. I love how much this has become like WoW, whining about patches and balancing, about classes(races) being overpowered and underpowered, about how compared to vanilla(Brood War) it's not the same. If you want identical races go play Supreme Commander or some shit, play Starcraft 2 for the strategy, the requirement that you keep up with macro, and for having to scout so you know what you're opponent is doing so you can counter it. You're acting like a Zerg can instantly go from having 50 hydras to having 100 mutas, guess what, they can't. It takes time for the switch from spire building to mutas building to having enough resources etc... And yes if you let a Zerg get 4 or 5 bases while staying on 2 you deserve to lose, simply because they out resource you like crazy. The problem is if you overcommit to marauder you die to muta ling/baneling anyway and if you overcommit to marine thor you get absolutey CRUSHED by infestor/baneling/roach or for the hell of it pure roach with auto surround. | ||
|
PanzerKing
United States483 Posts
On October 20 2010 23:33 Killerbot wrote: And so what if roaches rape marines, all it takes is a 50/50 investment and you can produce marauders one of the best ground vs ground units in the game. I love how much this has become like WoW, whining about patches and balancing, about classes(races) being overpowered and underpowered, about how compared to vanilla(Brood War) it's not the same. If you want identical races go play Supreme Commander or some shit, play Starcraft 2 for the strategy, the requirement that you keep up with macro, and for having to scout so you know what you're opponent is doing so you can counter it. You're acting like a Zerg can instantly go from having 50 hydras to having 100 mutas, guess what, they can't. It takes time for the switch from spire building to mutas building to having enough resources etc... And yes if you let a Zerg get 4 or 5 bases while staying on 2 you deserve to lose, simply because they out resource you like crazy. The thing about WoW is that most people who complain about balance don't know the first thing about PvP, but there's general consensus among the most skilled players on what is broken and needs to be fixed. You don't see that in SC2, not at all. Among top players, nobody wants to come out and admit what might be too strong or too weak because they all want to make a living off the game and they all have a stake in making their race appear as weak as possible. | ||
|
Jakalo
Latvia2350 Posts
On October 20 2010 23:33 AmstAff wrote: I said it since beta, people laughed at me and they flamed me. I said it when people like Dimaga pool rushed or baneling busted and failed and people laughed less at me but flamed me even more and I'm still saying it: ZERG IS THE BEST RACE, most zergs were just bad and hopefully people will accept this fact now without flaming! They went for FE, didn't scouted and just made drones and got rolled by an push (THE COUNTER TO EXPO + DRONE ONLY) now they FE and can't be bunkerrushed or harassed and pushes get destroyed because of the better economy and +1 range roach and I always said that lategame Zerg is unbeatable if they go EVEN (isnt it ridiculous that you have to be ahead to get a fair game?) into the mid- lategame because larvainject is way too strong. Zerg has the army which takes the last amount of skill, they only use 1 spellcaster/ability in most of the fights /infestor) and dont have the bonus damage shit and P/T units need more micro (hellion/tank focus fire, bio ball stim and micro / P has to make use of the hardcounterunits to focus the right shit + storm + sentry + even phoenix need micro in a fight against mutas) and finally Zerg has like 3 buildings (+ tech to get the units) for their macro management. You cant give a race a safe early game, an easy usable A move army (and with autosurround and no overkill/selfsplashing banelings it is an a move army unless you a move into a chokepoint), and the easiest macro in combination with the most effective macro. Zergs were crying they are going to switch over to Terran but they didnt, but after days the first switched from Terran to Zerg isn't this proof enough? If I wouldnt have played Terran since sc1 I would change too, damn I even changed from sc2 P to sc2 T because PvZ during beta was totally broken with the 1 supply roach and the funny a move, after a move from Zerg in the lategame. HOPEFULLY all the zergs will enjoy their freewins over the next weeks and finally realize that a BALANCED game with even games will make more fun even IF you lose against a better player! Finally the only thing that stops zerg from total domination are the maps (which are indeed anti-zerg) but imagine bigger maps with longer pushtimings, more expansions and wide areas to surround... I think it will be mostly impossible to win a game. Because if you indeed was saying this since beta I see why someone would ''flame'' you. You are totally disregarding patches and changes they brought and now after one quite poorly argumented thread you assume you ''have always been right'' | ||
|
DamageInq
United States283 Posts
-Zerg can build and economy faster, and can build an army faster, but when doing both at once they are actually slightly slower than Protoss and Terran. This means that Protoss and Terran have an advantage early game. Either the Zerg is building a crazy fast economy, or building a fast army. They can't build a fast army without a strong economy so this is the basis of Zerg builds, fast expanding and getting just enough defence to hold of the enemy early. If you let a Zerg play capitalize on his ability to grow a huge economy really fast, there's no doubt he's going to be set to capitalize on his ability to grow a huge army really fast. The counter to this is to harrass and push early. Even if the Zerg hold you off, you're delaying his economy. Zerg units simply aren't cost effective vs Protoss and Terran in most cases, so the way to beat a Zerg late game is to damage him enough early game. Even if we're talking about 1 hour long games. The Zerg wants to have 7 bases and creep everywhere at this point. It's up to the other player to deny expansions, reduce the creep ect. If they start attacking, you need to counter attack. As a Terran, once you're 200/200 you need to attack, you're 200/200 army should win in a straight up battle, and being the agressor allows you to do damage with your remaining forces before the Zerg has a chance to rebuild. | ||
|
Killerbot
United States106 Posts
On October 20 2010 23:36 Sadist wrote: The problem is if you overcommit to marauder you die to muta ling/baneling anyway and if you overcommit to marine thor you get absolutey CRUSHED by infestor/baneling/roach or for the hell of it pure roach with auto surround. There's this crazy concept called scouting, and you get basically free scouting using this ability called scan it's on your orbital command, you should try it instead of just spamming MULES. If you go marauder, expect more lings, so go for hellions/tanks/marines, which can defeat roaches in enough numbers. It's called Strategy! Expect responses to your responses, moves to counter your moves. Learn to adapt instead of complaining about imbalance. | ||
|
danl9rm
United States3111 Posts
On October 20 2010 22:20 UnholyRai wrote: The main problem is how the Zerg can suicide their entire army then near instantly rebuild it with multiple hatcheries + inject. I've watched it many times in professional matches, there will be a huge battle between a terran and zerg army, both armies nearly being completely wiped out. Within the next minute Zerg will be up to full strength and the Terran will be left with scraps. Game over. Read: Zerg units are free so long as they have the larvae to create them. Man am I playing Zerg wrong. | ||
|
Armsved
Denmark642 Posts
On October 20 2010 23:23 Jermstuddog wrote: I really don't get the "Zerg macro is unstoppable" mantra. There is no reason why you SHOULD be able to stop a 15 hatch Zerg in the first place. For the first 10 minutes of the game, a Zerg player is BEHIND in econ if they have to build ANY combat units. People need to stop acting like Zerg has some advantage by getting that hatch up. For the first 10 minutes, the FE is nothing but a LIABILITY for Zerg. Stopping all the bullshit that keeps a Zerg from getting that first hatch up is the first major step towards having a more balanced game. After the 10 minute mark, it's not like Zerg gets a free 3rd. He has to fight for it and it is typically much easier for T or P to get his natural up and running. Either way, assuming things go well for both sides, you end up with 3 base vs 2 base, which is very NORMAL. 2 OCs dropping MULEs keep Terran players competitive with the zerg players mineral income, Protoss is the most behind as Chrono boost isn't really that great once a base is saturated, but then again, they're more mobile and can more easily set up their 3rd. Why do you say this when it isnt true? If zerg goes hatch before pool and terran goes 1 rax FE, both players have flawless macro, zerg will be able to match terrans army while maintaining an econ lead. Not to mention that 1 rax FE commits to bio for atleast the first 8 minuts of the game, easily shut down by lings baneling. The hatch before pool is a huge deal when done by a zerg at around the 2k rating... | ||
GMarshal
United States22154 Posts
On October 20 2010 23:34 gREIFOCs wrote: No? Ultras die to thors, immortals and stimmed marauders with ease. They are actually just terrible against immortals. Broodlords are slow, weak and depend on their range and positioning to be effective. All pro gamers that go broodlords end up loosing some of them, even if the battle is leaning in favour of zerg. Please, explain me, what part of zerg late game "has no counter" as ultras and broodlords can be nullified with the choices that terran and protoss has. Even more, zerg late game, doesn't have a SINGLE UNIT that shoots up. You have to depend on corruptors or hydras which are tier 2 units. So, reading that someone thinks that zerg lategame is imba, when a single BC owns every single tier 3 zerg unit, is strange. Well I think your first problem is assuming that a Zerg player is going to go only tier 3 units, I mean if you are getting something like broodlords then you should probably also have corruptors lying around. While I will grant that thors beat ultralisks as do immortals,you have to realize that no one is going just ultras, its usually ultra + lings and lings absolutely rape immortals and thors and they do fairly well against marauders too. When people say that zerg lategame has no counter they aren't talking about individual units, but rather about the ability to trade armies and suddenly recreate their whole army before the other player can get more than as single production cycle in. | ||
|
PanzerKing
United States483 Posts
On October 20 2010 23:39 Killerbot wrote: There's this crazy concept called scouting, and you get basically free scouting using this ability called scan it's on your orbital command, you should try it instead of just spamming MULES. If you go marauder, expect more lings, so go for hellions/tanks/marines, which can defeat roaches in enough numbers. It's called Strategy! Expect responses to your responses, moves to counter your moves. Learn to adapt instead of complaining about imbalance. There's a fatal flaw with your argument. If T pushes out (and he has to push out, either to expand or to pressure Z once his army maxes since T can't bank resources/larvae like Z) then Z can scout his army composition. It takes a Z player, what, 30 seconds to build 25+ roaches? How many tanks do you think a T player can build in 30 seconds? | ||
|
Piski
Finland3461 Posts
 Or at least the new race to whine about op. | ||
|
Kamille
Monaco1035 Posts
| ||
|
mikell
Australia352 Posts
you assume a zerg is able to macro freely, this is really not the case. any competent terran/protoss can shut down expansions extremely easily with drops/harass. seriously, on the current map pool, this game is very favourable to terran and protoss. only in 'balanced maps' we see zerg taking control of the game... ie, blizzard is balancing on statistics based on the current map pool, which if they change, will change balance, more people will whinge about x race beats x race because x. zerg cannot suicide entire armies and eventually win. there is no reason to fight in unfavourable terrain for any race. in the case of zerg almost all terrain is unfavourable except in the middle of maps or on creep. you take advantage of this by expanding slowly and keeping up with defense and macroing against a zerg while harasssing and you win. this is the fundamental of every game. terran or protoss build up a death ball and box a move to zerg base. its even easier to win in early game. zerg is not underpowered, zerg is not overpowered, terran is not 'overpowered' but they are less underpowered than zerg when it comes to maps and unit strength. protoss are currently the most 'overpowered' because they can take any map regardless of race as they are the most versatile, and easiest to play with. | ||
|
Wr3k
Canada2533 Posts
| ||
| ||
