EPTOn November 02 2010 21:46 Keldaur wrote:
http://i.imgur.com/g5d3v.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/g5d3v.jpg
trol ??!!
TvZ matches in the GSL - Page 10
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
cilinder007
Slovenia7251 Posts
trol ??!! | ||
|
mati
Argentina114 Posts
On November 02 2010 08:36 Keldaur wrote: Is that hard to understand he is not speaking about OP/UP. You are speaking about foxer vs kyrix like something doable for people which are not top notch just because their opponents aren't. Baneling micro is not really hard, spread rines, re-stimming, focus fire with tanks banelings while you are doing is not something doable for anyone who is not already a topnotch player. So yeah, T can beat Z with massive skills. This post is about people whose TvZ is struggling and try to find a new way to play that matchup. It's not diamond T can beat diamond Z using the same strat, because most people (and by most, i mean.... everybody and their mother) can't micro macro that way (and you need to micro that way to be succesfull, because one bad move, and your toast), mostly because most people hasnt been practicing their whole lifetime. send ONE marauderer on the front, or ONE hellion... or anything you could squeeze that isnt light armored.... if the zerg just do "a-click" like you claim, he will loose so many baneling on that, it wont wort his while... keep your marine on a single control group, and all the micro you will need its gonna be "number - click away"... and thats it... If zerg is taking his banneling away from that tanking unit and manually following your marines (like he should!!), then he would be microing just as hard as you do... the harder you micro the harder he will have to micro to hit the marines... Zerg Diamond USA micro should be similar to terran Diamond USA... you should be fine, just be willing to improve yourself!  | ||
|
cArn-
Korea (South)824 Posts
On November 03 2010 08:52 mati wrote: send ONE marauderer on the front, or ONE hellion... or anything you could squeeze that isnt light armored.... if the zerg just do "a-click" like you claim, he will loose so many baneling on that, it wont wort his while... keep your marine on a single control group, and all the micro you will need its gonna be "number - click away"... and thats it... If zerg is taking his banneling away from that tanking unit and manually following your marines (like he should!!), then he would be microing just as hard as you do... the harder you micro the harder he will have to micro to hit the marines... Zerg Diamond USA micro should be similar to terran Diamond USA... you should be fine, just be willing to improve yourself! Can you stop this crap, foxer was MILES ahead in terms of skills of this kyrix guy and still barely won. Also, how can you even dare compare this kind of marine micro to a stupid MOVE COMMAND next to the marines before a-moving them ??? You are insane dude. | ||
|
EmilA
Denmark4618 Posts
On November 03 2010 08:52 mati wrote: send ONE marauderer on the front, or ONE hellion... or anything you could squeeze that isnt light armored.... if the zerg just do "a-click" like you claim, he will loose so many baneling on that, it wont wort his while... keep your marine on a single control group, and all the micro you will need its gonna be "number - click away"... and thats it... If zerg is taking his banneling away from that tanking unit and manually following your marines (like he should!!), then he would be microing just as hard as you do... the harder you micro the harder he will have to micro to hit the marines... Zerg Diamond USA micro should be similar to terran Diamond USA... you should be fine, just be willing to improve yourself! This is just outright silly. You're suggesting that terrans should just stutterstep (which every terran does already) and if the Zerg player isn't retarded and knows how issue a move-command it's fair that T losses because they broke even in "skill"? Also, hellions are light. | ||
|
mati
Argentina114 Posts
| ||
|
Sniffy
Australia290 Posts
it made my mutalisks completely irrelevant, and he micro'd excellently against my banelings (I dont amove then either). i lost but it was the most exciting match ive played in a while.  marines kite banelings (even with speed) exceptionally well off creep, and on creep he'd spread them really nicely. he was also quite liberal in killing creep tumours.The whining in this thread is kind of pathetic. whinging about nonexistant imbalance wont help you get any better | ||
|
avilo
United States4100 Posts
kyrix just happened to do so well because he plays the entire opposite of what every good zerg does - he does ling/baneling all-ins/aggro. What's worse is, if people really want to analyze...let's say...foxer vs kyrix game 5...kyrix had the game completely and utterly won. Creep spread over 50% of the map towards T, he killed T's entire army, and he was on 3 base. So what does he do? Instead of doing what top tier zergs do, he fails under the pressure and decides to continue randomly building banelings instead of droning up, defending with bane/roaches/infestor, and claiming his freewin that he rightfully earned after all the pressure he put on. foxer did indeed have great marine control, splits, and micro there on his part...but that was not at all what determined the direction of the game. Imagine had kyrix any semblance of a management game or macro, he'd have maintained his current army number after breaking into foxer's nat, he'd done up a little bit, get at least 1-2 infestors, and suddenly foxer is in a position where he HAS to attack and suicide into fungals/banelings, because if you don't zerg gets too big and you lose. and if you do, you suicide ur army into bane/infestor and you still lose. TvZ is a huge problem right now, and boxer is one of the few that are outspoken about it right now. Which he should be, because all the zergs were the last patches when it was totally against them. Basically, to sum up that game 5, kyrix had the game, all he had to do was play 1.1.2 defensive style zerg AFTER he'd gotten such a huge lead, and it would be mathematically impossible for fauxer to come back, no matter how good his marine micro is. Instead...kyrix stupidly decided to play the only possible style that terran has a chance of beating this patch...which is the aggro zerg style that has a million holes in it. So yes. Foxer won the series versus kyrix...but kyrix did not play the strongest zerg style possible. Had he better decision making, he would have immediately switched to how idra/fruitdealer play after he gained the massive lead and it would be impossible to lose the game. | ||
|
Keldaur
Spain55 Posts
On November 03 2010 08:52 mati wrote: send ONE marauderer on the front, or ONE hellion... or anything you could squeeze that isnt light armored.... if the zerg just do "a-click" like you claim, he will loose so many baneling on that, it wont wort his while... keep your marine on a single control group, and all the micro you will need its gonna be "number - click away"... and thats it... If zerg is taking his banneling away from that tanking unit and manually following your marines (like he should!!), then he would be microing just as hard as you do... the harder you micro the harder he will have to micro to hit the marines... Zerg Diamond USA micro should be similar to terran Diamond USA... you should be fine, just be willing to improve yourself! Man, you are comparing spread marines in 3-5 groups to 1 group move. Good job trying, so bad you are not thinking deep enough. And btw moron, hellions are light. Go get a fucking clue before you try to type something. I dislike whiners, but i dislike way more retards who try to tell people l2p with no real backup to explain why they should l2p. | ||
|
SWPIGWANG
Canada482 Posts
Marine micro can only get better as players get more skilled. Can banes even be microed to improve performance at anywhere the same level? If the answer is no, then the current situation would only improve for the terrain as players get better. To complain about it now is to complain how protoss is better in SC because 1a2a3a is so strong. We can talk about the balance when some sort of skill semi-upper limit is visible or that one side is just lol stomprolling the other. Instead...kyrix stupidly decided to play the only possible style that terran has a chance of beating this patch...which is the aggro zerg style that has a million holes in it. Macro, you mean lol Fruitdealer? If you conceed map control to Terran and just drone, you could be hit by a large number of attacks and die before noticing what happened. Hell, if foxer didn't get hit by the mass banes build, he wouldn't have lost g2/g3 in such silly fashion and I wouldn't say that isn't effective. Let the meta stabilize first before jumping trains, really. | ||
|
Moja
United States313 Posts
On November 03 2010 12:57 SWPIGWANG wrote: Think it about this way. Marine micro can only get better as players get more skilled. Can banes even be microed to improve performance at anywhere the same level? Banelings can be overlord dropped onto fungaled packs... | ||
|
HiHiByeBye
Canada365 Posts
On November 03 2010 10:07 mati wrote: ok crying will help you, keep it up It helped zergs get friendly patch changes | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
On November 03 2010 13:17 Moja wrote: Banelings can be overlord dropped onto fungaled packs... You're likely going to see more flanks to trap marines and prevent their ability to kite banelings. You may also people with mutalisks punish marine players with split up marine groups by picking off the edges of the group or attacking separated medivacs. People can also start incorporating burrowed banelings more often to delay/slow the marine pushes buying more time to get a critical amount of larva production or later tech. While not a straight micro skill the mind game of positioning and detonating burrowed banelings is key. Outside of that people will likely start abusing split marines by going more ling + upgrade heavy and exploiting the increased surface area the marine army has when split up. If you can get ahead of the marine player in upgrades lings become very effective. | ||
|
mati
Argentina114 Posts
On November 03 2010 11:22 Keldaur wrote: Man, you are comparing spread marines in 3-5 groups to 1 group move. Good job trying, so bad you are not thinking deep enough. And btw moron, hellions are light. Go get a fucking clue before you try to type something. I dislike whiners, but i dislike way more retards who try to tell people l2p with no real backup to explain why they should l2p. never claimed hellion being light, just said that bling are not cost effective agaisnt them, and also any non-light armored unit. Try to get a "clue on understanding text" before posting "moron"On November 03 2010 13:17 Moja wrote: Banelings can be overlord dropped onto fungaled packs... spreading marines works as well vs fungal grow as it does with banelling... On November 03 2010 14:13 Logo wrote: You're likely going to see more flanks to trap marines and prevent their ability to kite banelings. You may also people with mutalisks punish marine players with split up marine groups by picking off the edges of the group or attacking separated medivacs. People can also start incorporating burrowed banelings more often to delay/slow the marine pushes buying more time to get a critical amount of larva production or later tech. While not a straight micro skill the mind game of positioning and detonating burrowed banelings is key. Outside of that people will likely start abusing split marines by going more ling + upgrade heavy and exploiting the increased surface area the marine army has when split up. If you can get ahead of the marine player in upgrades lings become very effective. Im having lots of problem with this kind of "logic": Why did zerg manage to get banneling and mutalisk, infestors, droping overlords, while you only got marines? Terran players seem to be looking for a magic unit to be massed and win everything with just that... (not saying is your case Logo, just as a general rule about the post here)... The main reason you are making marines is to deal with mutalisks... If your opponent dont have mutalisks, and he is just going for lings/blings... you can make many other units to deal with them, hellions, sieges, even thors (you need so many bling to kill them, it wont be nearly cost effective). The main "thing" seems to be middle/late game options... lets say zerg is doing clasical: Mutalisks/Blings/Lings You can go.. Thors Hellions Marines, Thor can just sit there (no micro at all) keep hellions behind thors so they kill speedling on thor (click n hold, really isnt hard to do), marine running back from banellings... here is the micro intensive... but thats it... Baneling wont be able to "a click" or whatever, they will suicide vs thors... so they will have to micro as hard as you do.. Zerg doesnt have infinite gas, he must choose or balance between mutalisks/banelings... make more thor (you need 20 bling to kill one thor... 1000 mineral 500 gas vs 300m 200g) or marine acording your needs... Mutalisks can own spread marines? yes... but they need to clump together for that, becoming they self free kills for the Thor. He add droping overlords? Add some vikings (they will help vs mutalisks anyway) and do some focus fire with vikings + marines (also look at foxer play vs kyrix game 5) Getting infestor to early hurt zerg economy to badly... He cant get enough mutalisk/banelings AND infestor with out a 4th base... So if there are infestors on mid game, that means less of the others... If it is late game, add some raven (you should have 1 anyway to deal vs burrowed/creep tumors) with HSM, and hurt him badly... Zerg vs Terran isnt a Banelings vs Marine match just happend that kyrix vs foxer focus on that, and like Foxer himseld said on the interview... "Why did you go mainly marines vs banelings - I wanted to probe that you can defeat banelings with marines"... kinda of stuborn but well, he won, who can blame him? :p... And we are talking about the "direct counter" here... is like proving you can kill a pike unit with mounted unit... | ||
|
Chriamon
United States886 Posts
On November 03 2010 10:15 Sniffy wrote: I actually just played a diamond terran who went pure 3/3 marines just like foxer, im guessing he watched gsl. it made my mutalisks completely irrelevant, and he micro'd excellently against my banelings (I dont amove then either). i lost but it was the most exciting match ive played in a while. marines kite banelings (even with speed) exceptionally well off creep, and on creep he'd spread them really nicely. he was also quite liberal in killing creep tumours.The whining in this thread is kind of pathetic. whinging about nonexistant imbalance wont help you get any better Same, I played one earlier, expect I cut mutas and went infestor + bane/sling so I just fungaled and raped his marines. I feel like mass upgraded marines isn't the answer. What would Fake Boxer do if the opponent has fungals? Do you just spread marines all the time to avoid fungals? | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9376 Posts
On November 03 2010 12:57 SWPIGWANG wrote: Think it about this way. Marine micro can only get better as players get more skilled. Can banes even be microed to improve performance at anywhere the same level? If the answer is no, then the current situation would only improve for the terrain as players get better. To complain about it now is to complain how protoss is better in SC because 1a2a3a is so strong. We can talk about the balance when some sort of skill semi-upper limit is visible or that one side is just lol stomprolling the other. Macro, you mean lol Fruitdealer? If you conceed map control to Terran and just drone, you could be hit by a large number of attacks and die before noticing what happened. Hell, if foxer didn't get hit by the mass banes build, he wouldn't have lost g2/g3 in such silly fashion and I wouldn't say that isn't effective. Let the meta stabilize first before jumping trains, really. Thix would be true if it werent for infestors. With infestors in there you cant really micro as terran. | ||
|
Kanaz
Denmark658 Posts
A. If the zerg went infestors, they tended to be overwhelmed by my aggression during practice. He definitely made the right choice of not making infestors I think. From the GSL interview after the match. | ||
|
Klive5ive
United Kingdom6056 Posts
On November 03 2010 10:31 avilo wrote: It's not "non-existent" it's very existent. Just because kyrix does not know how to macro does not mean the games would have been close if it was a stronger Zerg. This type of argument is so incredibly stupid. But I expect nothing less from Avilo. Yes if Kyrix was better he would have won. Also if Foxer was better he would have won more easily. Wow what a profound argument /facepalm. | ||
|
itsMAHVELbaybee
292 Posts
Spreading vs infestors would help a lot in my opinion. Most zergs keep their banes back a little bit a try to get the fungal off first, but if you spread and send only a portions of army ahead at a time you ruin the cost effectiveness of fungals, however you need to scan ahead and know where his infestors are so you are able to micro in time. Also cutting something like mutalisks might leave you more susceptible to medivac drops and viking/banshee shenanigans. I think FoxeR's aggression early on makes many zergs think twice about trying to tech to infestors as it may leave them vulnerable to the pressure if they don't continue to pump out lings/roaches/mutas. | ||
|
Geo.Rion
7377 Posts
On October 27 2010 04:05 eatpraylove wrote: I counted the results up to now. Zerg are up: + Show Spoiler + 21-8 in games 9-3 in series The top Terrans have got some figuring to do. yeah the 3 Terrans in the top4 just ended up there somehow | ||
|
avilo
United States4100 Posts
On November 04 2010 00:32 Geo.Rion wrote: yeah the 3 Terrans in the top4 just ended up there somehow Terrans had the most representation in the tournament. Think rationally please. | ||
| ||
