EPTThe Zerg Help Me Thread - Page 428
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
Make sure you read the OP before asking a question. Asking a question already addressed in the OP will result in moderation action. Also, please put some effort into your questions. | ||
|
phrenzy
United Kingdom478 Posts
| ||
|
learning88
United States160 Posts
| ||
|
Azoryen
Portugal242 Posts
I'd like to ask how gm/master players deal with this. Do they have completely flexible builds and can adapt to anything? Or do they just make small variations, like: if you get attacked, you make a few units, static defense and then go back to what you were doing? Doesn't that mess up with the supply reference for the builds then? Thanks. | ||
|
Bayyne
United States1967 Posts
| ||
|
6xFPCs
United States412 Posts
On November 21 2012 23:24 learning88 wrote: 6xFPCs. Thx for the help. I was wonderin where can i find those games. The only place i know of to look for vids is on youtube which they dun have. It takes some sifting to find what you want, unfortunately. I don't recall which games have examples other than I think Hyun vs finale in FC, the game on metropolis. So yeah the free resources I use are IPL FC (http://www.ign.com/ipl/starcraft-2/videos/ipl-fight-club), because hyun has been the defending champ for quite awhile, and the razer replaypacks from TLpro (such as: http://www.teamliquidpro.com/news/2012/11/21/razer-replaypack-of-the-week-50-liquidsheth). For completeness' sake I'll add some more info about my resources: I also bought a subscription to NASL season 4. They're pretty horrible about properly linking and uploading game videos, and they don't seem to ever note walkovers and such things on the videos page (the only place I go), but I don't mind going to their twitch.tv page and picking out stuff by game or day. The main reason NASL is good is because of the sheer number of pros, and pro games. You get to see a lot of raw data that's not filtered by tournament prep or anything. I also grab the occasional high-level replay packs in SC2 Strat forum. These represent "goals", that is, a level that I might conceivably be able to achieve for one aspect of play if I really practice hard (say, top master-level injecting, or base saturation, if I were to drill one thing for an hour). I use them to see what the next level of play should look like, which is often much more useful for practicing than trying, for instance, to use a VOD to dissect stephano's natively talented, somewhat free-form, mysteriously effective play. | ||
|
syriuszonito
Poland332 Posts
On November 22 2012 07:36 Azoryen wrote: Zerg being the reactive race, I have trouble developing routines for my builds and strategies. I'd like to ask how gm/master players deal with this. Do they have completely flexible builds and can adapt to anything? Or do they just make small variations, like: if you get attacked, you make a few units, static defense and then go back to what you were doing? Doesn't that mess up with the supply reference for the builds then? Thanks. Its still a routine just with more patterns. You should always go into the game with a certain gameplan in your head (this is how you open, what you want your mid and lategame to look like). Then upon scouting your opponent you are making small variations to your build order. Let me use zvp as an example: you open with a pool into 3 hatch, take gases at 44 supply. Now if you dont see the gases at toss natural till 6:45 you should place the roach warren right then, if you see the gases you can delay it for about 30 secs. The better you get, the more little adjustements you will be doing to perfectly react to your opponents build. Does that mess up with the supply reference? Yeah it does quite a lot but you do not really rely that much on supply aside from the opening, rather on the situation ingame (using your attack example: if usually you get your third base in zvt after you are saturated on 2 bases then if some early pressure forces you to make units/ static defense you should still be taking third base after you hit optimal saturation on 2 base, even though its gonna be different time and supply than normal). Hope this makes any sense :D | ||
|
Neighko
United States6 Posts
I am in bronze looking to improve. I have a lot of trouble reacting to the different units my opponents make. I mean, I am familiar with the counters but I never seem to be able to execute it I suppose. I have been told that tech to BL/infestor is the way to go late game vs. terran, is that true with other races as well? Also I have lots of trouble with timing the building of structures/units. I am working on improving macro, larvae injects, creep spread etc. but I would really appreciate some pointers from the more experienced  Some replays-- http://drop.sc/277637 ZvT, teched to brood lords, unsure what exactly I did wrong? I was confused by what he was doing I think and didn't respond well because I was too focused on brood lords? http://drop.sc/277638 ZvT as well, I won with BL but I still think there are many things I could have done better If someone would be so kind and point out what I did wrong and how to correct them, also as what I did well so I can continue to do these things I would really appreciate it. If more replays or information are needed I would be glad to supply. Thank you so much! I really am eager to improve my game, and any input is appreciated. | ||
|
Azoryen
Portugal242 Posts
On November 22 2012 09:58 syriuszonito wrote: Its still a routine just with more patterns. You should always go into the game with a certain gameplan in your head (this is how you open, what you want your mid and lategame to look like). Then upon scouting your opponent you are making small variations to your build order. Let me use zvp as an example: you open with a pool into 3 hatch, take gases at 44 supply. Now if you dont see the gases at toss natural till 6:45 you should place the roach warren right then, if you see the gases you can delay it for about 30 secs. The better you get, the more little adjustements you will be doing to perfectly react to your opponents build. Does that mess up with the supply reference? Yeah it does quite a lot but you do not really rely that much on supply aside from the opening, rather on the situation ingame (using your attack example: if usually you get your third base in zvt after you are saturated on 2 bases then if some early pressure forces you to make units/ static defense you should still be taking third base after you hit optimal saturation on 2 base, even though its gonna be different time and supply than normal). Hope this makes any sense :D About the gameplan: I can't have the same gameplan against every T. If I plan to go muta/ling/bane and he goes mech, I must now make roaches. He's the one dictating the game plan, not me. Am I right? About the supply reference: I've actually thought about this before: instead of using total supply as a reference, maybe it's better to just use total workers, because the later doesn't change if you are force to make some lings/extra queens for defense. You think that can work? | ||
|
ThePastor
New Zealand380 Posts
On November 22 2012 07:36 Azoryen wrote: Zerg being the reactive race, I have trouble developing routines for my builds and strategies. I'd like to ask how gm/master players deal with this. Do they have completely flexible builds and can adapt to anything? Or do they just make small variations, like: if you get attacked, you make a few units, static defense and then go back to what you were doing? Doesn't that mess up with the supply reference for the builds then? Thanks. Currently mid masters, I like to think of my games in stages and I have end goals for each stage (early/mid/late), depending what happens throughout the game will ultimately change what happens but I will generally always end up at a similar place at the end of that stage. For example, in ZvP I always plan to have three bases and 55~ drones out by the end of the early stage, if 7 gate all ins me obviously this will be quite delayed as I have to defend at a earlier drone count, however once I have defended I know I want to get back to that drone point. I love muta in ZvP so my goal is to have a solid muta flock in the mid game, if he immortal all ins me obviously I won't have a flock of mutas but a lot of roach/lings, however, depending how the game goes I end up getting back to mutas eventually...and so the game goes on. Maybe a better way of thinking of it is aim to have benchmarks, these can't be strict benchmarkers because things happen in game that alters the way you play, however you should have guiding benchmarks that help you get back on track again. As for supply builds I tend to never use 'build X at 30 supply' (outside of '15hatch' etc). I tend to plan my builds by general timings of what else is going on, for example, one of my common ZvT builds is what Life does, big round of speedlings to pressure terran natural, I cut drones when speed is about half done. I find using general guidelines better for my zerg play as then when the opponent throws a weird spanner in the works I can get back on track much easier by looking at what is going on around me. Hope this helps, Z | ||
|
Azoryen
Portugal242 Posts
On November 22 2012 17:27 zasg wrote: Currently mid masters, I like to think of my games in stages and I have end goals for each stage (early/mid/late), depending what happens throughout the game will ultimately change what happens but I will generally always end up at a similar place at the end of that stage. For example, in ZvP I always plan to have three bases and 55~ drones out by the end of the early stage, if 7 gate all ins me obviously this will be quite delayed as I have to defend at a earlier drone count, however once I have defended I know I want to get back to that drone point. I love muta in ZvP so my goal is to have a solid muta flock in the mid game, if he immortal all ins me obviously I won't have a flock of mutas but a lot of roach/lings, however, depending how the game goes I end up getting back to mutas eventually...and so the game goes on. Maybe a better way of thinking of it is aim to have benchmarks, these can't be strict benchmarkers because things happen in game that alters the way you play, however you should have guiding benchmarks that help you get back on track again. As for supply builds I tend to never use 'build X at 30 supply' (outside of '15hatch' etc). I tend to plan my builds by general timings of what else is going on, for example, one of my common ZvT builds is what Life does, big round of speedlings to pressure terran natural, I cut drones when speed is about half done. I find using general guidelines better for my zerg play as then when the opponent throws a weird spanner in the works I can get back on track much easier by looking at what is going on around me. Hope this helps, Z That very interesting, thank you! Maybe it makes even more sense to me to think in terms of stages defined only by the benchmarks without calling them early/mid/late and maybe have more than 3 stages, but I start to get a feeling for how to think. The 'get back on track' is the fundamental thing here. My builds get all messed up by harassment, I guess I need a more adaptable way of thinking if I want to play zerg. If I prefer to follow always the same route, maybe I should be playing P or T instead? Or maybe it's not that different, I mean, they can also get attacked/harassed... maybe less though, because Z tends to play more macro style and other races feel they need to 'distract' us from that... | ||
|
Guileful
Kazakhstan137 Posts
| ||
|
syriuszonito
Poland332 Posts
On November 22 2012 17:01 Azoryen wrote: About the gameplan: I can't have the same gameplan against every T. If I plan to go muta/ling/bane and he goes mech, I must now make roaches. He's the one dictating the game plan, not me. Am I right? About the supply reference: I've actually thought about this before: instead of using total supply as a reference, maybe it's better to just use total workers, because the later doesn't change if you are force to make some lings/extra queens for defense. You think that can work? Muta/ling/bane should never be your long term plan in zvt, this is a great composition for mid game but later on you have to switch to tier3 (or all in with roaches). The only thing that really changes is that you build a reactionary roach warren to survive the mid game. Aftere playing XX games vs mech it becomes a routine as well: open mutas -> defend cloack banshee + helion -> counter with mutas while saturating your third -> did I do enough dmg? Yes - then all in mass roach , No - then take 4th and tech to bl/infestor. About the supply reference: Yeah it can work, I use my worker count as a trigger to do something quite often. Ideally you would want to have your build order connected with 3 thing, your overall supply (use this when everything goes as planned) , your worker count (when opponent makes an aggresive build) and game time (when you fuck up your macro, overreact to fake pressure or smth) but instead of carefully planning this I'd suggest to just play more games, probably the best way to get your gamesense improved. | ||
|
Saechiis
Netherlands4989 Posts
| ||
|
Defenestrator
400 Posts
On November 23 2012 04:55 Saechiis wrote: I have been playing Zerg for the last couple of weeks and been playing an ultra baneling with drops style versus Terran with good succes. Any reason good Zergs don't max on ultra, zergling, baneling adding a few nydus canals when maxed? Trading efficiently with your heavy resource max attack and reinforcing straight to the frontline via "mass" nydus? I play a similar style in ZvP. It's a lot of fun; right now I think the meta is just different and BL/festor is really powerful. This is pretty viable though. I see a lot of pros also go ultras on their streams in ZvT. | ||
|
ThePastor
New Zealand380 Posts
On November 22 2012 18:42 Azoryen wrote: That very interesting, thank you! Maybe it makes even more sense to me to think in terms of stages defined only by the benchmarks without calling them early/mid/late and maybe have more than 3 stages, but I start to get a feeling for how to think. The 'get back on track' is the fundamental thing here. My builds get all messed up by harassment, I guess I need a more adaptable way of thinking if I want to play zerg. If I prefer to follow always the same route, maybe I should be playing P or T instead? Or maybe it's not that different, I mean, they can also get attacked/harassed... maybe less though, because Z tends to play more macro style and other races feel they need to 'distract' us from that... I don't think it is much different as T or P, I only played them briefly in the beta however so I may be wrong. Regardless of what race you play you need to loosely hold your strategies for the game, because your strategies are always based off what your opponent is doing. One of the reasons Stephano is so amazing is because generally he never goes with a plan but just 'does stuff' in reaction to what his enemy is doing. Obviously when you have had as much experience as Stephano you can make much better judgement calls so I wouldn't recommend having a 'do whatever' approach when you are first starting. As you said a 'get back on track' mind set is really the idea, then regardless of what happens you know where to go when the proverbial feces hits the fan! My last ZvT the guy went absolutely ballistic drops when I was attempting to get BL out and it delayed by BL tech by about 5 minutes because I was running around trying to defend drops and build static defense, however once the storm had passed I knew, BL time! And crushed him muahahaha! | ||
|
ThePastor
New Zealand380 Posts
On November 23 2012 04:55 Saechiis wrote: I have been playing Zerg for the last couple of weeks and been playing an ultra baneling with drops style versus Terran with good succes. Any reason good Zergs don't max on ultra, zergling, baneling adding a few nydus canals when maxed? Trading efficiently with your heavy resource max attack and reinforcing straight to the frontline via "mass" nydus? This is a build that TLO does some times to good effect, I think the reasons people tend to go BL first is that it forces a lot of vikings and then switching from broodlords to ultras is even more powerful because (as we all know) vikings are kind of worthless against ultras. The other thing is, I find when I mass up ultras (as I do on occasion) they just pump out a million marauders, Terran tend to have the facilities to switch to mass marauder a lot easier (talking bio builds of course) then all of a sudden having to throw down starports in order to get vikings. Ultras are definitely an option but I do believe you need to have a relative hold of the game to do it, if you are keeping pressure on and limiting their income then its a great option, if they have had free income and powering up hard then you may struggle a lot because a really good player with upgraded bio will wreck ultras with sick kiting. | ||
|
Azoryen
Portugal242 Posts
So far my style / game plan is just trying to counter every type of harassment or all-in my opponents throw at me, while trying to get a macro advantage to crush him later with a much larger army. I do this because I'm assuming I should perfect macro first since I don't have the multitasking to harass and macro well at the same time. But sometimes I feel it's too passive and that I should be trying to throw him off his comfort zone as well with my own harassment, which is something I never do. Would you say I'm in the right direction, or would you recommend a more agressive style since the start? What worked for you in the beginning? | ||
|
DarkBaneling
United States13 Posts
On November 23 2012 08:06 Azoryen wrote: I'd like to ask experienced zerg players who went through the race's learning process, what you guys recommend as a good style to start with and improve fast. So far my style / game plan is just trying to counter every type of harassment or all-in my opponents throw at me, while trying to get a macro advantage to crush him later with a much larger army. I do this because I'm assuming I should perfect macro first since I don't have the multitasking to harass and macro well at the same time. But sometimes I feel it's too passive and that I should be trying to throw him off his comfort zone as well with my own harassment, which is something I never do. Would you say I'm in the right direction, or would you recommend a more agressive style since the start? What worked for you in the beginning? Yes, sounds like a good start to me. Practice not missing injects, not getting supply blocked, crucial timings in your build, maintaining correct drone saturation and generally good mechanics. I wouldn't worry about much else until you can do that stuff flawlessly in a passive game. Question for any high level zergs: What do you use camera hot keys for, if at all? I use the control group style that most koreans use (seperate hotkey for every hatch) and can't think of enough uses for the camera hot keys to warrant learning to use them. I can already pop back to any individual base with my control groups. I know tons of top zergs use camera hotkeys, but what specifically are they using them for? Maybe for creep, crucial maps areas, or scouting? | ||
|
Mavvie
Canada923 Posts
-Less actions. F1 is less than 55 or whatever you bind your hatcheries to. -Works even if no hatchery at a base. Say in ZvT you wanna take your third. F2 -> select a drone -> F3 -> move command and then build hatch. Faster than using minimap. -Better for defending multiprong. You don't lose your selection when tabbing between bases, like you do when you just bind all your hatcheries to a hotkey -Better against drops. If you lose a hatch, you still have the camera hotkey, but you don't have the control group, so you have to use minimap to send units there/to retake the hatch. | ||
|
templar rage
United States2509 Posts
| ||
| ||
