OP I think you are only taking 1 zerg build into example and trying to state that a bunker rush makes terran imbalanced because it fairs well against a 12hatch. What your failing to realize is that every race has counter builds, and depending on your opening, your opponent could do a build directly catored to it. For example, you can relate a bunker rush countering a 12hatch like how 9pool speed lings can counter 1rax expo. You can either break their ramp, or mass em up and storm his expansion before he has firebats.
One thing I read that you posted was this paragraph:
"Too bad 4/5 pool will fail miserably if it is scouted 5 seconds before lings arrive to base. T just has to block ramp with scvs and wait for the 1st marine. And if Z scouts Bunker rush 5 seconds too late? Well thats too bad, Z will get punished severely for it. See my point? T always goes unpunished for something they should be punished for (Ex. T Overexpanding - > Z attacks T expansion - > T lifts CC and sends SCV to main, main entrance blocked, T saves expansion vs. Z overexpanding -> T attacks Z expansion -> Z cannot lift hatchery -> drones die much faster and easier than SCVs die because marine is ranged and fastest DPS -> Z loses expansion) "
First off, if a zerg 5 - 6 - 7 pools or w/e, you will need a fair amount of scvs on your ramp to stop him from getting in. The chances of scouting it usually are 1 in 3 as most maps are 4 players. So it's rather easy to mis-scout the 5-6-7 pool, and not have the adequate amount of workers on your ramp to delay it. Second, if you pull 6-7 scvs from mining to defend a 5-6-7 pool, you are obviously going to be just as far behind economically as he will be. It's not like you can magically put 2 or 3 scvs on the ramp, and his 6 lings will fail. If you do not seriously move 6-7 of them, odds are he is gonna rape them all to shit. Combine that with rally point zerglings, and you can easily lose the game. If you do manage to get 1 marine out, you still need 5-6 scvs on your ramp to stop him from coming up. So again, your economy is really poor during that time. Typically you are running off of 1 barracks, and because your scvs are on your ramp, your command center is going to be greatly delayed, (if your expanding) or your 2nd rax / acad will be much later.
Now, the 2nd part of that statement was that terran can easily lift off his command center, and go unpunished if zerg breaks his natural. Personally, unless you caught him while his units were somewhere else, breaking his natural is not him going unpunished. If you beat his army, and force him to lift his natural CC, then he is being punished...heavily. It's a macro war, and if you killed whatever army he had at his natural, and forced him to lift his command center, then you are winning the macro war. The minute you kill his army, and he lifts, the game is shifted into your control. You still have an army, he has to rebuild. You can safely take another gas main, because you have map control. You can basically abuse his small army, and macro hard. So quite frankly, I don't even understand where you thought up that idea, because it's wrong.
In conclusion, I do find bunker rushing to be effective, but with todays level of play, it's almost game deciding if you fail and fall behind in macro / build timing etc. I can bunker rush, and depending on how easily he defended it, my whole build is now delayed, while his is less effected (usually 3 hatch muta which is gas based anyway). So someone with really great muta micro will hit my main before im ready to handle it properly. (possibly range upgrade is not finished, or turrets are late etc.)
Ok to those of you who actually replied with detail, I'm actually going to spend my time and reply back because you weren't like idiots who accused me of "playing Terran less than 5 times"
First of all, I understand that Zerg also is capable of cheesing. For example, 4/5 pool. However, let me remind you that 4/5 pool is an all-in strategy. Even if it is scouted late, it only takes a few seconds to block ramp with SCVs. On the other hand, Bunker rush is NOT an all-in strategy (1~2 scvs) If it is scouted late, basically you need a lot of zerglings to take down a repairing bunker. Also, you will have a lot of losses in early game. I understand that going 8 rax is not beneficial for T econ as well. However, you should understand that 8 rax does not hurt your econ as much as 9 pool does because of this rush.
That brings me to a point. You guys said there was a counter to Bunker rush and that is 9pool. Well, believe me or not, Zerg is a macro race. If you go 9 pool and T or P plays it safe, it is very hard for Zerg can compete in terms of economy in mid/late game. Most T or P players tend to FE nowadays and 9 pool can be blocked easily by T if he knows what he is doing. Because the Zerg's only unit production building is Hatchery, its optimal to try to increase your production building early game so you can make drones earlier for better economy. Furthermore, Zerg economy works MUCH different than T or P's. Terran or Protoss each have a separate building for solely for worker production. Z has to split larvaes for both drones and fighting units. This is why 12 hatch is incredibly needed in the advanced level of expanding in SC nowadays because superior micro today can block early rushes easier than long ago.
You see? Zerg goes 9 pool and T goes 8 rax. Who is at more econ disadvantage? Zerg. Zerg fails 5 pool and T fails bunker rush. Who is at more econ disadvantage? Zerg. I'm not talking about winning or losing games with bunker rush. I'm talking about the amount of presssure and advantage that you get from doing it.
For more support on my point, look at the Zerg champion Jaedong's recent ZvT verses Frozean upmagic, and go.go. These medicore Terrans all chose to Bunker rush Jaedong. If you watch all those games, you can see the econ advantage they received from bunker rushing. (JD had to cancel 12 hatch in 1 game) I think 1 or 2 games, the Terran player lost anyway even with advantage because JD is overwhelmingly good but he couldn't win them all because some of those T players were decent enough to utilize on bunker rush's econ advantage. (JD vs Frozean)
Furthermore, people should stop blaming the maps for Z losses in TvZ. Its just that T has much more advantage than Zerg in TvZ (For ex. 1 dropship has the potential to totally rape 1 Zerg expo, 1 Overlord with zerg units cannot rape 1 Terran expo. Terran can lift CC and save it from destruction, while Z cannot save Hatchery by simply lifting it off. You place a few marines and medic behind the mineral line and they become untouchable with micro. To defend a T natural mid game, you need 2 bunkers, few tanks, and turrets. The cost of defending Z natural? couple of lurkers, 3~4 sunks (525~700 minerals), lings.
On November 15 2008 06:59 F13 wrote: Ok to those of you who actually replied with detail, I'm actually going to spend my time and reply back because you weren't like idiots who accused me of "playing Terran less than 5 times"
First of all, I understand that Zerg also is capable of cheesing. For example, 4/5 pool. However, let me remind you that 4/5 pool is an all-in strategy. Even if it is scouted late, it only takes a few seconds to block ramp with SCVs. On the other hand, Bunker rush is NOT an all-in strategy (1~2 scvs) If it is scouted late, basically you need a lot of zerglings to take down a repairing bunker. Also, you will have a lot of losses in early game. I understand that going 8 rax is not beneficial for T econ as well. However, you should understand that 8 rax does not hurt your econ as much as 9 pool does because of this rush.
That brings me to a point. You guys said there was a counter to Bunker rush and that is 9pool. Well, believe me or not, Zerg is a macro race. If you go 9 pool and T or P plays it safe, it is very hard for Zerg can compete in terms of economy in mid/late game. Most T or P players tend to FE nowadays and 9 pool can be blocked easily by T if he knows what he is doing. Because the Zerg's only unit production building is Hatchery, its optimal to try to increase your production building early game so you can make drones earlier for better economy. Furthermore, Zerg economy works MUCH different than T or P's. Terran or Protoss each have a separate building for solely for worker production. Z has to split larvaes for both drones and fighting units. This is why 12 hatch is incredibly needed in the advanced level of expanding in SC nowadays because superior micro today can block early rushes easier than long ago.
You see? Zerg goes 9 pool and T goes 8 rax. Who is at more econ disadvantage? Zerg. Zerg fails 5 pool and T fails bunker rush. Who is at more econ disadvantage? Zerg. I'm not talking about winning or losing games with bunker rush. I'm talking about the amount of presssure and advantage that you get from doing it.
For more support on my point, look at the Zerg champion Jaedong's recent ZvT verses Frozean upmagic, and go.go. These medicore Terrans all chose to Bunker rush Jaedong. If you watch all those games, you can see the econ advantage they received from bunker rushing. (JD had to cancel 12 hatch in 1 game) I think 1 or 2 games, the Terran player lost anyway even with advantage because JD is overwhelmingly good but he couldn't win them all because some of those T players were decent enough to utilize on bunker rush's econ advantage. (JD vs Frozean)
Furthermore, people should stop blaming the maps for Z losses in TvZ. Its just that T has much more advantage than Zerg in TvZ (For ex. 1 dropship has the potential to totally rape 1 Zerg expo, 1 Overlord with zerg units cannot rape 1 Terran expo. Terran can lift CC and save it from destruction, while Z cannot save Hatchery by simply lifting it off. You place a few marines and medic behind the mineral line and they become untouchable with micro. To defend a T natural mid game, you need 2 bunkers, few tanks, and turrets. The cost of defending Z natural? couple of lurkers, 3~4 sunks (525~700 minerals), lings.
In all honosty, I just don't think you know what 9pool is even capable of. Its not a disadvantage build. You are seriously comparing 8rax all-in with a doomed economy, to a standard 9pool opening? You 9pool, make 6 lings and expand as you rally them to his choke. Your expo is hardly delayed, and you have 6 lings. If he is Going FE, and builds it at his natural, he is gonna have to bunker up ASAP, or risk cancelling it. 9Pool is no way a disadvantagous build.
second, you compare 1 dropship to 1 overlord, which is just wrong. Why would you compare 2 different units that require 2 different techs? Overlords are double as supply, so naturally you have alot of them. Terran dropship is a tech choice, usually made AFTER vessels. Furthermore, 2 lurkers in an overlord dropped behind a mineral line can be just as dangerous as 7marines and 1 medic or w/e. Also, 90% of zergs that know how to play will have dropship defence at their natural and usually at their expos as well. You cannot drop 7marines 1 medic and expect to beat 2 lurkers and a sunken.
Personally, I find that you are using your own lower level play as the standard to base balance. Just because a terran is capable of doing all of this to you, and you cannot see the equality, doesn't mean its not there. You are basing balance off of your own results, which are of course flawed.
Also 1 more thing that I just have to mention. You just keep saying that zerg will lose alot of units trying to stop a bunker rush, and yet you have not once said to build a sunken colony. Sunkens OUTRANGE bunkers. Why would you seriously throw 6 drones and 6 lings at a bunker being repaired, when you can make a sunken just out of shooting range, target the scv, then kill the bunker without losing all of your drones. It just seems like you think the only way to stop his bunkering is to throw all your units at it blindly. Also, if he bunkers you, whats wrong with going 2 hatch muta? since he is obviously a bit behind because he is focusing on killing your natural. 2 hatch muta comes very early, and what are the odds that he has turrets up and marine range? There are many ways to take advantage of the situation. Throwing all your shit at him blindly, is not 1 of them
On November 15 2008 06:59 F13 wrote: Ok to those of you who actually replied with detail, I'm actually going to spend my time and reply back because you weren't like idiots who accused me of "playing Terran less than 5 times"
First of all, I understand that Zerg also is capable of cheesing. For example, 4/5 pool. However, let me remind you that 4/5 pool is an all-in strategy. Even if it is scouted late, it only takes a few seconds to block ramp with SCVs. On the other hand, Bunker rush is NOT an all-in strategy (1~2 scvs) If it is scouted late, basically you need a lot of zerglings to take down a repairing bunker. Also, you will have a lot of losses in early game. I understand that going 8 rax is not beneficial for T econ as well. However, you should understand that 8 rax does not hurt your econ as much as 9 pool does because of this rush.
That brings me to a point. You guys said there was a counter to Bunker rush and that is 9pool. Well, believe me or not, Zerg is a macro race. If you go 9 pool and T or P plays it safe, it is very hard for Zerg can compete in terms of economy in mid/late game. Most T or P players tend to FE nowadays and 9 pool can be blocked easily by T if he knows what he is doing. Because the Zerg's only unit production building is Hatchery, its optimal to try to increase your production building early game so you can make drones earlier for better economy. Furthermore, Zerg economy works MUCH different than T or P's. Terran or Protoss each have a separate building for solely for worker production. Z has to split larvaes for both drones and fighting units. This is why 12 hatch is incredibly needed in the advanced level of expanding in SC nowadays because superior micro today can block early rushes easier than long ago.
You see? Zerg goes 9 pool and T goes 8 rax. Who is at more econ disadvantage? Zerg. Zerg fails 5 pool and T fails bunker rush. Who is at more econ disadvantage? Zerg. I'm not talking about winning or losing games with bunker rush. I'm talking about the amount of presssure and advantage that you get from doing it.
For more support on my point, look at the Zerg champion Jaedong's recent ZvT verses Frozean upmagic, and go.go. These medicore Terrans all chose to Bunker rush Jaedong. If you watch all those games, you can see the econ advantage they received from bunker rushing. (JD had to cancel 12 hatch in 1 game) I think 1 or 2 games, the Terran player lost anyway even with advantage because JD is overwhelmingly good but he couldn't win them all because some of those T players were decent enough to utilize on bunker rush's econ advantage. (JD vs Frozean)
Furthermore, people should stop blaming the maps for Z losses in TvZ. Its just that T has much more advantage than Zerg in TvZ (For ex. 1 dropship has the potential to totally rape 1 Zerg expo, 1 Overlord with zerg units cannot rape 1 Terran expo. Terran can lift CC and save it from destruction, while Z cannot save Hatchery by simply lifting it off. You place a few marines and medic behind the mineral line and they become untouchable with micro. To defend a T natural mid game, you need 2 bunkers, few tanks, and turrets. The cost of defending Z natural? couple of lurkers, 3~4 sunks (525~700 minerals), lings.
In all honosty, I just don't think you know what 9pool is even capable of. Its not a disadvantage build. You are seriously comparing 8rax all-in with a doomed economy, to a standard 9pool opening? You 9pool, make 6 lings and expand as you rally them to his choke. Your expo is hardly delayed, and you have 6 lings. If he is Going FE, and builds it at his natural, he is gonna have to bunker up ASAP, or risk cancelling it. 9Pool is no way a disadvantagous build.
second, you compare 1 dropship to 1 overlord, which is just wrong. Why would you compare 2 different units that require 2 different techs? Overlords are double as supply, so naturally you have alot of them. Terran dropship is a tech choice, usually made AFTER vessels. Furthermore, 2 lurkers in an overlord dropped behind a mineral line can be just as dangerous as 7marines and 1 medic or w/e. Also, 90% of zergs that know how to play will have dropship defence at their natural and usually at their expos as well. You cannot drop 7marines 1 medic and expect to beat 2 lurkers and a sunken.
Personally, I find that you are using your own lower level play as the standard to base balance. Just because a terran is capable of doing all of this to you, and you cannot see the equality, doesn't mean its not there. You are basing balance off of your own results, which are of course flawed.
Also 1 more thing that I just have to mention. You just keep saying that zerg will lose alot of units trying to stop a bunker rush, and yet you have not once said to build a sunken colony. Sunkens OUTRANGE bunkers. Why would you seriously throw 6 drones and 6 lings at a bunker being repaired, when you can make a sunken just out of shooting range, target the scv, then kill the bunker without losing all of your drones. It just seems like you think the only way to stop his bunkering is to throw all your units at it blindly. Also, if he bunkers you, whats wrong with going 2 hatch muta? since he is obviously a bit behind because he is focusing on killing your natural. 2 hatch muta comes very early, and what are the odds that he has turrets up and marine range? There are many ways to take advantage of the situation. Throwing all your shit at him blindly, is not 1 of them
The reason why i made fun of your post is beacuse you've yet again proven you don't actually know wtf you are talking about. Just read exigens post and you'll see why.
defending against bunker rush is easy as long as you pull enough drones fast enough before he completes the bunker or kill the rines and block them from getting in the bunker
On November 15 2008 06:59 F13 wrote: That brings me to a point. You guys said there was a counter to Bunker rush and that is 9pool. Well, believe me or not, Zerg is a macro race. If you go 9 pool and T or P plays it safe, it is very hard for Zerg can compete in terms of economy in mid/late game. Most T or P players tend to FE nowadays and 9 pool can be blocked easily by T if he knows what he is doing. Because the Zerg's only unit production building is Hatchery, its optimal to try to increase your production building early game so you can make drones earlier for better economy. Furthermore, Zerg economy works MUCH different than T or P's. Terran or Protoss each have a separate building for solely for worker production. Z has to split larvaes for both drones and fighting units. This is why 12 hatch is incredibly needed in the advanced level of expanding in SC nowadays because superior micro today can block early rushes easier than long ago.
Uh, what?
If that's the case, why is 9pool speed used so commonly at pro-level (e.g. 9pool speed into 4hatch hydra) against Protoss? Denying scout + early map control more than overcomes the short-term macro disadvantage, especially because you can quickly grab two expos off the control.
As in aside, can someone tell me how viable 12-pool is in ZvT? Someone told me that it was the safe, newbie opening that can resist bunker rushes, but doesn't sacrifice as much econ as 9-pool.
When z 9pools, terran usually has 1 or 2 marines made by the time the lings get there. If he's getting an earlier rax he may have more, but if he made the earlier rax he'll probably be sending those marines to zerg, in which case zerg can kill the marines and terran has to use pure scv and maybe 1 marine depending on a bunch of things. Basically though, no matter what, terran has to pull atleast 3 scvs to be completely safe, and possibly can lose scvs and marines at the same time, on top of losing scouting. If he was planning on doing an all-in bunk rush, he probably loses the game out-right, and can be in a disadvantage state if he was bunk rushing too, and even if he wasn't bunk rushing and perfectly blocks your lings, he's losing scvs and timing. One micro mistake on his part could get lings in his main which just give terran a horrible headache and can end the game.
Bunk rushing is basically has a high probability of giving terran an advantage is zerg 12hatches, but then 12hatch itself is basically a macro-cheese. Bunk rush alone doesn't even really counter this, unless terran brings 6+ scvs, and even then zerg can come out alive with 2bases, map control, and good-enough mining. Terran can constantly produce scvs sure, but zerg's drones will be mining at 100% efficiency with his drones until he gets over 16 (depending on the map), whereas the advantage of each additional scv for terran lessens significantly as every new scv is made. Bunk rushing can reduce drone count, but zerg can likely still come out fairly economically strong since he has 2bases. 7 drones total is enough to fully support constant production of lings/drones/ovys for 2hatcheries, and zerg probably has more drones than that after a bunk rush. The presence of additional zerg military units is not inherently an advantage for terran anyway. Zerg has so many options after the bunk rush that the advantages terran seemingly get from bunk rushing a 12hatch are not as clear-cut out as you say. I'm not talking about if terran does really serious damage to zerg, that's an odd case since most zergs can prevent bunk rushes from ending the game or disabling them entirely.
On November 15 2008 03:13 BlackStar wrote: It's harder to stop a bunker rush than it is to do one. In that respect SC is imbalanced.
But in SC it's all over the place. And in the case of T you basically need D+ skills to beat D players. And C- skills to beat D+ players. So in ZvT I don't see what's there to complain.
Its also much harder to defend a six pool than it is to A move your lings to a unsuspecting base. That is the risk and reward part of cheese, if you succeed you have won the game with minimal effort, if you fail you will certainly lose the game to a good opponent. Therefore the game is actually balanced since each race has a comparable strategy which is equally hard to deal with for each race.
I don't think six pooling is the same thing though. A six pool is basically an all in while a terran can do a bunker rush while only delaying themselves a bit. It's because zerg has to trade off drones to build zerglings while terran can keep pumping scvs. If you look at the kwanro game linked a few posts up you can see how many scvs Really had. Protoss has 2 gate which is the same sort of deal. Zerg can't do cheese and come back from it like the other races, it's almost always an all-in.
I play zerg so I may be a bit biased .
Edit: Terrans might feel similarly about muta harass now that I'm trying to empathize. It's sort of similar in that you need to build defense/waste resources to protect yourself from something you can't stop from coming. Except it's a lot worse for zerg because it's at the start of the game and you don't have as many options. Terran could sunken break before mutas or whatever.
Well each race feels a economic hit in order to cheese. A cannon rush can be preceded by cutting probes as your forge arrives, not to mention 1 pylon and 1 cannon is 250 minerals, plus the missed mining time of the probe and your attention. If he nine pools and you fail the cannon rush then you are certainly dead, hell just cancel his natural and run past your cannons or simply kill them with lings.
Proxy gates too leave your open to economic disasters. I am always inclined to cut probes to make 3 on my first pylon and the second pylon comes up in time for the fourth to begin. Its always a gamble with any kind of all in build. When Zerg goes six pool the objective is purely do to enough damage to your opponent to set him more behind than you are. Look at July vs Best, five pool game but he comes out of it with a decent economy, a hatchery at his nat and a good amount of lings. Because Best was so far behind him after the initial rush that theres was nothing he could do.
How would you play bloodbath if you couldn't make a bunker until factory. Wtf?
PS- I dont 12 hatch FE as much anymore for 2 reasons, 1. Most terrans do 1/2 Rax FE and 2. some will try and bunker rush. overpool handles these situations well.
An unsuccesful bunkerrush into CC has severe problems dealing with 2 hatch muta. T shouldn't have range, stim, turrets and enough marines to deal with good muta micro if T fails to kill enough drones with the rush and follows it up with an expo.
You must remember that because muta-micro has improved so much lately, T really can't afford to skimp on marines. 8 Rax into bunkerrush into expansion will leave the T with low marine numbers. Z should take advantage of that.
Okay there has already been quite a few alternatives and ways to handle a bunker rush, mainly: a) micro your drones well b) use a different BO c) scout it properly d) pull more drones e) make a sunken I just want to elaborate a little more on e). What I have noticed,(as a terran player when i try a bunk rush) some players will instantly pull a drone and bring it to their nat when they first see an SCV. (as in not like when the bunker is already halfway done, bring your 2nd ovie outside your nat to scout this SCV like spiral said). Start chasing the SCV with it, if it starts to make a bunker use that drone what was chasing it to start a creep colony right away(and sunken as soon as it finishes), you might have to wait a few seconds if the hatch hasn't finished building for its creep though. start maynarding drones to your expo like you would usually do and because the sunken outranges the bunker it should take care of it. If he is a little more risky and brings more scvs for an allin then use the drones you sent to your nat to mine to protect your sunk further. if he hasn't backed down yet make a few lings when your pool finishes. Seriously though, 1 sunk only costs 175$ in total and this way you will bearly lose any mining time unless he does an allin bunker rush. but even if he did it doesn't matter if u are a little behind because when if it fails then u have probably won. so lets say he just does a regular bunker rush, you lose 175$, he loses 100 for bunker, 50 for scv, and any extra money he might have spent on an early 2nd rax. you are usually down at most 25$ and you have secured your FE, his expo is going to be a good minute late or so, so you are therefore ahead. 25$ lost is better than delayed terran FE.
EDIT: And happy birthday Chill, same day as me in Canada too o_O. coincidence i guess.
There is no way a Terran can pick off drones with single rines with one scv. Drones are faster than rines, and so it is rather easy to surround single rines with 4 drones and kill them quickly. I always 12 hatch in ZvT, and I always produce at least four lings after my pool is done, so at least the way I play, producing the initial lings doesn't effect my build at all. Assuming I was keeping an eye at the scouting scv and saw the bunker while it was building, I only really end with a short mining time loss for 4-5 drones.
a bunker rush off of a 10rax or 11rax that fails to do significant damage is WAY HUGE BAD for terran.
zergs response is 2 hat -> gas - > lair then speedlings, 8 or so speed lings into 2 hat muta/ling into 3rd gas 3 hat muta/ling/lurker into 5 hat hive.
In terms of base security the terran is normally pretty safe after an eco friendly bunker rush but the timming for his builds will be off and mutalisks will be powerfull longer while zerg can macro longer.
I use luxurys overpool -> 3 hat lair every game zvt because its the 89 rax or 10/10 rax that can ruin your day t.t
If you float your first ovie out and send your scout at 12, you've already got a 2/3 chance of finding him. You don't have to bring drones at all unless you actually see the marines/SCVs coming (check for a rax in his main; if it's there, sit outside and wait). (if you're cross positions... bad luck? You can just scout at 9 or something though >_> )
On November 15 2008 06:59 F13 wrote: Ok to those of you who actually replied with detail, I'm actually going to spend my time and reply back because you weren't like idiots who accused me of "playing Terran less than 5 times"
First of all, I understand that Zerg also is capable of cheesing. For example, 4/5 pool. However, let me remind you that 4/5 pool is an all-in strategy. Even if it is scouted late, it only takes a few seconds to block ramp with SCVs. On the other hand, Bunker rush is NOT an all-in strategy (1~2 scvs) If it is scouted late, basically you need a lot of zerglings to take down a repairing bunker. Also, you will have a lot of losses in early game. I understand that going 8 rax is not beneficial for T econ as well. However, you should understand that 8 rax does not hurt your econ as much as 9 pool does because of this rush.
That brings me to a point. You guys said there was a counter to Bunker rush and that is 9pool. Well, believe me or not, Zerg is a macro race. If you go 9 pool and T or P plays it safe, it is very hard for Zerg can compete in terms of economy in mid/late game. Most T or P players tend to FE nowadays and 9 pool can be blocked easily by T if he knows what he is doing. Because the Zerg's only unit production building is Hatchery, its optimal to try to increase your production building early game so you can make drones earlier for better economy. Furthermore, Zerg economy works MUCH different than T or P's. Terran or Protoss each have a separate building for solely for worker production. Z has to split larvaes for both drones and fighting units. This is why 12 hatch is incredibly needed in the advanced level of expanding in SC nowadays because superior micro today can block early rushes easier than long ago.
You see? Zerg goes 9 pool and T goes 8 rax. Who is at more econ disadvantage? Zerg. Zerg fails 5 pool and T fails bunker rush. Who is at more econ disadvantage? Zerg. I'm not talking about winning or losing games with bunker rush. I'm talking about the amount of presssure and advantage that you get from doing it.
For more support on my point, look at the Zerg champion Jaedong's recent ZvT verses Frozean upmagic, and go.go. These medicore Terrans all chose to Bunker rush Jaedong. If you watch all those games, you can see the econ advantage they received from bunker rushing. (JD had to cancel 12 hatch in 1 game) I think 1 or 2 games, the Terran player lost anyway even with advantage because JD is overwhelmingly good but he couldn't win them all because some of those T players were decent enough to utilize on bunker rush's econ advantage. (JD vs Frozean)
Furthermore, people should stop blaming the maps for Z losses in TvZ. Its just that T has much more advantage than Zerg in TvZ (For ex. 1 dropship has the potential to totally rape 1 Zerg expo, 1 Overlord with zerg units cannot rape 1 Terran expo. Terran can lift CC and save it from destruction, while Z cannot save Hatchery by simply lifting it off. You place a few marines and medic behind the mineral line and they become untouchable with micro. To defend a T natural mid game, you need 2 bunkers, few tanks, and turrets. The cost of defending Z natural? couple of lurkers, 3~4 sunks (525~700 minerals), lings.
This is ridiculous. There's nothing wrong with stating a wrong opinion, but doing so with this kind of arrogance while showing an alarming lack of knowledge isn't an attractive combination.
Your argument is almost word for word the one used 4 years ago after the Ever OSL semis by people who believed Boxer had just 'made TvZ imbalanced'. It was a reasonable line of thinking back then right after the shock of the 3-0, but fortunately we know a lot more about bunker rushes and how to defend against them now. You sound like Hong Jin Ho whining about how 'it's very hard for Zerg to win against Terran if they pool first'.
Not scouting a bunker rush is dreadful play.
All your descriptions of how bunker rush usually plays out are horribly off. You don't take 6+ drones to chase off the scv building the bunker then lose drones to one marine.
Terran's loss when his bunker rush fails isn't in the amount of minerals lost (as you seem to think), but in the delaying of his expansion. Expanding anyway is now a risky move for him as his tech will be delayed and his marine count lowered and he has no scouting SCV left. 2 hatch muta suddenly becomes a much bigger threat.
Your last paragraph there's the most ludicrous attempt to prove imbalance I've ever seen, just random (not to mention wrong) facts thrown together. There are good points to argue that ZvT is hard, the most important of which is probably that one mistake is usually enough to lose you the game, but the balance of this matchup is a complex issue that shouldn't be reduced to things like bunker rushes.
EPT
.
