|
Firstly I'm a gold (single) & silver-bronze level 3v3 random player. I've probably played about 40 3v3 games so far. I almost always play Protoss, though Zerg would be my off-race.
Anyways from these games, by far the most feared Race for me is facing Zerg. Especially in multiples (say 2). 3v3 seems to be a game of rushing, and 2 x Zerg rush is very hard to defend. Especially on some 3v3 maps where you are isolated.
Even if they don't win the game right there they can pressure you into turtling while they expand, or their allies tech up safely. Then late game, Mutas are so mobile, they can constantly harass and ensure you have no safe expansions.
Just wanted to ask more experienced players than me what they think of Zerg in 3v3, what counters there are to this type of play, and whether for 3v3 I should just switch to them 
|
I sort of disagree, I play a lot of 3v3 diamond with my friends and the only problem is that it is hard to get a 3rd base running with a zerg based on most maps and most teams usually have same number of bases because it is difficult to hold a 3rd somewhere. Being even bases isn`t the best thing for zerg.
Double 6 pool is pretty damn annoying to deal with though, because scouting 3 bases that early takes more time.
|
I mean, there are a lot of different playstyles... but if the players in your game aren't capable or willing or care enough to control the spread of creep, I think zerg is always the best race (zerg player talking).
Having the most mobile (and somewhat balanced) army is of such tremendous value for me, and on a huge map like that, whereas terran and protoss only have a few very mobile units, every unit (on creep) for zerg, with the exception of brood lords, are faster than all but the fastest couple units in both protoss and terran.
This means ally support and better harassment, which to me, is what principally wins bigger games.
I don't think most players are good enough to realize these aforementioned advantages though (myself included most of the time).
|
zerg is definitely the worst team race, as for them to truly be effective they generally have to have an additional expansion relative to their opponent. In team games aggressive expansion is highly risky, and defending concerted attacks become exponentially harder as the number of players increase. In my experience with team games, in the end the zerg is sitting on 2 base, never able to secure their 3rd and complaining about how ineffective they are. (Granted, this is for 2v2s, but expanding should only be harder in 3v3s)
|
Depends on maps, for example on bigger maps zerg can harass like crazy with just lings + nydus. Many 3 player armies rely on them being clustered together so runbys and harass are super effective. This will also allow your buddies to macro up. Remember that zerg doesn't really need to expand in a 3v3. Your mates can always send you cash and you can spam extra hatches. people tend to underestimate the power of 3-3 cracklings aswell.
|
it definitely depends. I main toss but 3v3randomteams as zerg for warmups and the only thing that really puts them down is an early timing attack with no help from your allies.
If thats not the case, then I can always get out mass roach or mutas to harass and it kinda turns into a cakewalk from there (assuming my allies are all decent).
|
It really depends on Maps, levels of aggression (From your team and the opposing team) if you have no aggression you can take all the bases you want, drone like crazing and pop 30 mutalisks once your spire is done.
I had a hilarious 3v3 one game where I was terran, we had one zerg, and one toss. Toss cannon rushed, I built nothing but marines, and took the gold with a Planetary fortress on Arakan Citadel, then took another base while churning out marines from like 15 Barracks.
Also the triple 6 pool is like, instant knock out 1-2 players.
|
zerg i think is the weakest team race because of there need for expansions. and the team maps that encourage turtleing and timing attacks. if your a really good zerg you want every base on the map, except for maybe the 2-3 that your opponent is gonna take.
|
No way, all zerg harassment techniques work even better with more targets and less coordination. A group of 20 speedlings running around hitting all the expansions is deadly, 40 speedlings can run around and just kill CCs. Mutas are also far more effective in team games for the above noted reasons. Banelings have more grouped targets....although I agree in the late game zerg units seem to be a bit less effecitve compared to tank/collosus armies, luckily team games are less likely to go into the late game
|
I think blizzard did a pretty good job with the maps for Team games. Like others said, an all zerg team has the an insane advantage in mobility, much like in SC1. However as people have probably noticed, a lot of the maps seem to be "unfavorable" to zerg since there are many maps where there is not a close "natural", or a close or definite third. I really like how they did this, it sort of evens out the zerg race in team games. Although they might be at a slight disadvantage because it can be hard for them to still secure a +1 base advantage, it's not like you can't play on equal base count as the other races. It's just that you won't be able to as effectively pump drones and make your army at the last second.
On a slightly different note, how do you defend against triple cheese? for example 3 6pools. Every team game seems to be whoever has the better or earlier push or rush. "Macro" builds seem impossible on many maps due to this. Even if you do survive, someone will most likely be killed off, which will sort of suck (well yeah I guess that isn't a very good point though since teams should be sharing control anyways).
|
Zerg can do some interesting strategies, but these really mostly work when another teammate can turtle for you (read: terran), and depending on the map. Maps where bases are together, the zerg can often tech and power drones for pretty much the entire early game (lair before queen anyone?). For maps with split bases, a 7RR supported by marine spam (or 2x 7rr) can work quite well. Oh and a pretty good rule of thumb for 3v3... scout with your first worker. I'd say this applies even more in diamond, lots of people will try some random cheese that will require coordination from your team to fend off, its very worth it to lose a tiny bit of eco to avoid an instaloss.
|
Depends on the map. I'd argue that zerg is best on: a) tiny maps and b) giant maps.
Quicksand is tiny and great for early pool rushes. Zerg is quite powerful here as they are able to sacrifice their early economy to overwhelm the opponent with zerglings/banelings early in the game.
Arakan Citadel is good for zerg because it is a huge map, which means that zerg can sneak in expansions around the map. Their mobility allows them to control most of the map.
Bad maps for zerg are, arguably, maps like Monsoon which are naturally "cut in half." You only have a natural expo per person, and a gold base located off to the side. It is also extremely hard for zerg to acquire the gold base because terran can just tank from the cliffs above it. But most importantly, it is extremely hard to acquire more than half of the bases on the map, because the other half of the bases are located on the other side of a nice little choke in the middle. Without the extra resources, you have to "outmicro" your opponents resource per resource, which is pretty hard for zerg to do lategame.
|
Personally, I'm torn on this idea, because if a zerg gets a third, it can swarm and rip one enemy apart, and the other team falls apart, but they can almost never get a third. Protoss seems better, because they can secure a second, and their "Few/expensive, but powerful" idea makes large numbers dangerous.
|
Liking the discussion on this guys, 3v3 doesn't get a whole lot of love on TL. I know its often touted as 'not a serious' format etc, but thats why I like it.
I'm going to try to get my team mates to take out a Zerg early as they often never turtle and probably can't defend that well.
|
I think having a single Zerg on your team is extremely powerful. Just because their typical army in 1v1 needs you to be one base ahead of your opponent doesn't mean they're weaker in team games. In fact, it's quite the opposite. Zerg has a tough time breaking down walls, that's why they generally stay back and expand themselves, but in team games when the opponent walls, it becomes dead weight. P or T allies will have an easy time tearing down those walls ESPECIALLY if it's not a ramp up. The Zerg will be able to 1 base mass lings (and you can get A LOT of speedlings off one base very fast) and stream in.
Also, keep in mind that being aggressive also makes Zerg great, you can force battles in team games and force your opponent to stay together. This means they can't just sit in their base and let your lings be ineffective. If your ally gets attack, you have to either go help, or you're letting him die. And it's really hard to help knowing that there's mass lings on the field.
So is Zerg weak in team games? Sure, if you're not aggressive and don't expand, but a team with a Zerg can be super hard to deal with. Remember, the Zerg can decide when to have a battle or not early in the game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
