EPT[D] The new Zerg standard for all match-ups? - Page 40
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
DisaFear
Australia4074 Posts
| ||
|
Nowayouthere
3 Posts
in zvp: aren't you forced to get your gas at 13-14 or how else do you want to deal with the two stalker+ 1-2 zealot aggresion from a protoss to your expansion. Speedlings seem necesseary to be able to catch the offcreep stalker since they can kite you due to the zealot. i am talking of the kind of thing freedslwerra did in gsl two if i remember correctly | ||
|
jacobman
217 Posts
On December 11 2010 18:42 Nowayouthere wrote: including the danger that this question has already been asked: in zvp: aren't you forced to get your gas at 13-14 or how else do you want to deal with the two stalker+ 1-2 zealot aggresion from a protoss to your expansion. Speedlings seem necesseary to be able to catch the offcreep stalker since they can kite you due to the zealot. i am talking of the kind of thing freedslwerra did in gsl two if i remember correctly This is just guessing, but wouldn't you kill the zealot first? Also you wouldn't engage the army off of creep if you don't have speed. If they come all the way in to hit your hatch then you should be able to get the zealot. Am I right? Speed is extremely useful. The stalker push is hard, but I really don't think that your claim that you'll die if you don't get gas at 13 or 14 is true. These are the types of things that need to be played out by diamond players, just like the 2rax is being planned. It would be great if some diamond zerg players got together with other diamond players to specifically test certain situations against different builds. | ||
|
TehForce
1072 Posts
- Works fine in any teamgames - Works fine in ZvZ, ZvP - Works fine in ZvT (no 2rax) BUT: It doesn't work when you play against a 2rax-terran who knows what he is doing. Reasons: - Because my hatchery is so late (in comparison to a 14-hatch-build) i can't place a spinecrawler at my expansion before his attack comes (no creep yet), so i need mass zerglings to not lose my expansion. Problems with this: A) If he fake-pressures (moving out with his marines and some scvs but never attacks) i produce a whole lot of zerglings for beeing able to hold this. But instead of attacking he expands. I am now about 10 workers behind plus he has 2 mules. After 5-10 minutes constant pressure he will just steamroll me because i am way behind economally. B) If i produce to less zerglings, or just my secound round of new zerglings would be able to kill his army, he just builds bunkers at the bottom of my ramp (no creep yet) and i autolose. | ||
|
Bobgrimly
New Zealand250 Posts
| ||
|
TehForce
1072 Posts
| ||
|
Nowayouthere
3 Posts
and that you cannot engange them offcreep is totally clearly but they are at your natural and will try to snipe the queen/hatch/whatever Here is a replay of what i mean( though the zerg holds it off barely it shows the importance of having fast speedlings in zvp http://sc2rep.com/replays/gsl2010s2d3/2259 | ||
|
Hurkyl
304 Posts
On December 11 2010 19:11 TehForce wrote:A) If he fake-pressures (moving out with his marines and some scvs but never attacks) i produce a whole lot of zerglings for beeing able to hold this. But instead of attacking he expands. I am now about 10 workers behind plus he has 2 mules. After 5-10 minutes constant pressure he will just steamroll me because i am way behind economally. The thing I find so very mind-boggling is how so many people seem to have the thought process
and it doesn't seem like this alternative process has even crossed their minds:
| ||
|
dementrio
678 Posts
On December 11 2010 19:42 Hurkyl wrote: [/list][*] My opponent decides to expand, with light unit production facilities [*] Therefore, I will mass units and go kill him You can try (or are forced to) an all-in to get yourself back but it has a high chance of failing, because both T and P have very cost efficient defenses - bunkers and force fields. You may have a bigger army but they can delay/hold off your push very cheaply until your worse economy will starve you out. And the main problem is, terran does not have to sacrifice anything with a 2rax opening. They just have to show up with a few marines at your door and you are automatically way behind while they have the option to continue aggression, expand, tech, do whatever they want. | ||
|
Natt
France253 Posts
On December 11 2010 19:42 Hurkyl wrote: The thing I find so very mind-boggling is how so many people seem to have the thought process
and it doesn't seem like this alternative process has even crossed their minds:
Well, try this against decent terran, you will see the results. Any competent player will scout if you drone or not, bunker up, and simcity the choke with barracks and bunkers. T1 Zerg is not particulary strong, so even with a good force of roach+lings+blings, there is no way you can enforce this. Moreover, bunkers are impossible to kill if the terran brings scv (given bunker is safe from blings, but anyway, you cannot bust 4 bunkers with blings). I totally agree with TehForce's analysis here. | ||
|
jacobman
217 Posts
On December 11 2010 19:41 Nowayouthere wrote: @jacopman the problem is that the two stalker melt your zerglings to nothing if you attack the zealot, and that you cannot engange them offcreep is totally clearly but they are at your natural and will try to snipe the queen/hatch/whatever Here is a replay of what i mean( though the zerg holds it off barely it shows the importance of having fast speedlings in zvp http://sc2rep.com/replays/gsl2010s2d3/2259 I'm going to be honest and say that I don't know if I believe two stalkers will "melt" your lings. I've never really found stalkers to be that spectacular against lings. The only reason they are any good in the beginning is their speed, not their ability to "melt" lings. You should still be able to snipe the zealot if they get too close, at which point you're in a much better position. I don't know, all of this is really speculation at the moment, which is what the original poster want to avoid. There's little point to bashing two opposing hypothesis together if you're not going to test it to come to a conclusion. | ||
|
TobiWan
Germany6 Posts
 I tried it but I lost against a baneling bust. Didn't know what to do against these sweet bombs. Spinecrawler didn't help, my roaches didn't either.  | ||
|
unbal3
Korea (South)131 Posts
| ||
|
Hurkyl
304 Posts
On December 11 2010 20:18 dementrio wrote: [/list]You can try (or are forced to) an all-in to get yourself back but it has a high chance of failing, because both T and P have very cost efficient defenses - bunkers and force fields. You may have a bigger army but they can delay/hold off your push very cheaply until your worse economy will starve you out. If your Terran opponent voluntarily stays in his base, you no longer need to attack to counter the expansion. If they manage to build a lot of static defense at their natural despite your army, that's still a good result -- none of that money can be used to pressure you and keep you from Droning up and/or taking a third. And the main problem is, terran does not have to sacrifice anything with a 2rax opening. He sacrifices the ability to push out with 15 marines at 5:00. He sacrifices the ability to have a cloaked banshee before 8:00. He sacrifices the ability to have a Siege Tank covering a fast expansion. He locks himself into pure Marines without any upgrades or Marauder support or for a couple minutes. And, of course, every SCV he builds is another Marine he cannot have for some time. 2 rax is not a "best of all worlds" build. It allows many things to be done adequately, but none exceptionally. Having many adequate allows it to do well against builds who lock themselves into only one option. So, naturally, I'm skeptical of the conclusions of arguments that involve locking one's self into only one option. | ||
|
jdseemoreglass
United States3773 Posts
On December 11 2010 19:11 TehForce wrote: I played this build the last days and came to following conclusions: - Works fine in any teamgames - Works fine in ZvZ, ZvP - Works fine in ZvT (no 2rax) BUT: It doesn't work when you play against a 2rax-terran who knows what he is doing. Reasons: - Because my hatchery is so late (in comparison to a 14-hatch-build) i can't place a spinecrawler at my expansion before his attack comes (no creep yet), so i need mass zerglings to not lose my expansion. Problems with this: A) If he fake-pressures (moving out with his marines and some scvs but never attacks) i produce a whole lot of zerglings for beeing able to hold this. But instead of attacking he expands. I am now about 10 workers behind plus he has 2 mules. After 5-10 minutes constant pressure he will just steamroll me because i am way behind economally. B) If i produce to less zerglings, or just my secound round of new zerglings would be able to kill his army, he just builds bunkers at the bottom of my ramp (no creep yet) and i autolose. I wonder if he actually experienced this or if he is repeating the analysis that's been repeated before lol... I have had trouble understanding this argument since it began. In every 2rax push I have ever seen, zerg never gets the opportunity to finish a spine in time to defend. I've been asking for replays or VODS of this, but I haven't found them. Without having a spine crawler as defense, then a hatch first build will need exactly the same number of lings as a pool first in order to defend. The notion that for some reason you pump lings until you are 10 drones behind is an assumption I cannot make without actually seeing it in action. The notion that a bunkered ramp is more difficult to hold off with an earlier pool doesn't make much sense to me either. I know ret and Idra are being used as the basis for all of these claims, but they sound like really broken theorycraft arguments. If anyone has seen a single game where this theory was actually encountered, I would love to see it. In general, the notion that Terran can produce workers and units simultaneously and the Zerg is forced to produce 100% units in reaction would indicate the game is impossibly broken. I don't think this is the case though. | ||
|
jacobman
217 Posts
On December 12 2010 00:20 jdseemoreglass wrote: I wonder if he actually experienced this or if he is repeating the analysis that's been repeated before lol... I have had trouble understanding this argument since it began. In every 2rax push I have ever seen, zerg never gets the opportunity to finish a spine in time to defend. I've been asking for replays or VODS of this, but I haven't found them. Without having a spine crawler as defense, then a hatch first build will need exactly the same number of lings as a pool first in order to defend. The notion that for some reason you pump lings until you are 10 drones behind is an assumption I cannot make without actually seeing it in action. The notion that a bunkered ramp is more difficult to hold off with an earlier pool doesn't make much sense to me either. I know ret and Idra are being used as the basis for all of these claims, but they sound like really broken theorycraft arguments. If anyone has seen a single game where this theory was actually encountered, I would love to see it. In general, the notion that Terran can produce workers and units simultaneously and the Zerg is forced to produce 100% units in reaction would indicate the game is impossibly broken. I don't think this is the case though. I'm not quite sure what your argument is, but I can understand the sentiment that you do not understand where other people are getting their views from. | ||
|
Hurkyl
304 Posts
On December 12 2010 00:20 jdseemoreglass wrote:Without having a spine crawler as defense, then a hatch first build will need exactly the same number of lings as a pool first in order to defend. There are two more relevant aspects that make some difference (but I have no idea how much):
(Well, technically, you have the stalling option with Pool first -- but you have to stall for a longer amount of time) | ||
|
GQz
Australia168 Posts
Okay so I think the haters need to chill. And IMO, this is actually rather smart thinking. Instead of forcing a hatch first for an economical advantage (and blaming terran all-ins/bunker contains to be OP as I have been doing >.>), this is a guy that's said 'Hey, if I get an early pool, I can get extra larvae from a fast queen instead of the extra hatch. Also, by expanding later and getting my pool earlier, I can force the opponent into making extra, unnecessary units, delaying his tech.' So while I wouldn't use this build on EVERY map (unless there's a huge metagame shift), I will definitely be trying this on steppes of war, where the terran ramp wall-in and scv-marine all in are zerg's worst nightmare. | ||
|
Vaporized
United States1471 Posts
On December 12 2010 00:20 jdseemoreglass wrote: I wonder if he actually experienced this or if he is repeating the analysis that's been repeated before lol... I have had trouble understanding this argument since it began. In every 2rax push I have ever seen, zerg never gets the opportunity to finish a spine in time to defend. I've been asking for replays or VODS of this, but I haven't found them. Without having a spine crawler as defense, then a hatch first build will need exactly the same number of lings as a pool first in order to defend. The notion that for some reason you pump lings until you are 10 drones behind is an assumption I cannot make without actually seeing it in action. The notion that a bunkered ramp is more difficult to hold off with an earlier pool doesn't make much sense to me either. I know ret and Idra are being used as the basis for all of these claims, but they sound like really broken theorycraft arguments. If anyone has seen a single game where this theory was actually encountered, I would love to see it. In general, the notion that Terran can produce workers and units simultaneously and the Zerg is forced to produce 100% units in reaction would indicate the game is impossibly broken. I don't think this is the case though. maybe people are saying the same thing because it is true. i have experienced this personally. if u 11 pool and the terran is in any way competent you will be behind. i played a game on metal a few days ago and it went exactly as described. i 11 pool. he makes a handful of marines, marches to my base, scans and sees i made lings, pulls back and expands. from that point forward i am behind. this one game was enough for me to realize that 11 pool against 2 rax is bad. you can have a spine 50-100% completed if u 14 hatch. try it yourself. edit: heres a replay of 14 hatch and the spine. he doesnt attack the spine while it is building, and his rush is countered as a result. http://replayfu.com/download/gTHDdq | ||
|
Skrag
United States643 Posts
On December 11 2010 13:40 jdseemoreglass wrote: Once the opportunity for flaming disappears, Skrag leaves as quickly as he came... Yeah, cause life and sleep couldn't possibly have had anything to do with my absence. No apology for turning my thread into a childish mudslinging battle for hours... He attacks me and calls me a jackass twice, a moron twice, a blind-single-minded fanatic, and so on, and he won't even bother to end with a civil comment after I give him what he wants. Your comments directed towards me, jacobman, and pretty much everybody in this thread, through your choice of words like "garbage" and "waste of time" have been extremely inflammatory, and if you don't recognize that, then I maintain you are, in fact, a moron. As long as you continue to insist that you haven't flamed or attacked anybody anywhere in this thread, despite the number of comments asking you to chill out, my comments will stand, with no apology intended. | ||
| ||
