| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
TheAmazombie
United States3714 Posts
The marines are not OP, they are just good, but so are a lot of speelings with a few spines. Zerg are trying to push for so much early econ trying to reach that late-game mass macro ability that makes them so strong, but sometimes they need to step back and take less risks. Those are my opinions as a zerg player, but, well, Ret could probably kill my maxed out army with just drones if he wanted, so who am I to really say. | ||
|
Samhax
1054 Posts
Hatch first give you a strong lead in the mid-game if you are untouched, that's why terran hard pressure early and force a ton of zergling and maybe a spine, but when you don't go hatch first they can deal with it in the mid game just with pure macro and expand normally. | ||
|
Zerokaiser
Canada885 Posts
On December 07 2010 18:07 Samhax wrote: Ret and Idra are really biased, it's not even funny. We played months (I'm a zerg, in case) without hatch first, now they are saying without hatch first you can't play zerg? Sorry but i don't buy it. The game looked a hell of a lot different a month ago. We played months without hatch first back when barracks didn't require a depot and Zealots had a shorter build time. Players are getting better, patches are coming out, strategies are being developed, and the same-old same-old just might not cut it anymore. | ||
|
teamsolid
Canada3668 Posts
On December 07 2010 18:07 Samhax wrote: Ret and Idra are really biased, it's not even funny. We played months (I'm a zerg, in case) without hatch first, now they are saying without hatch first you can't play zerg? Sorry but i don't buy it. Hatch first give you a strong lead in the mid-game if you are untouched, that's why terran hard pressure early and force a ton of zergling and maybe a spine, but when you don't go hatch first they can deal with it in the mid game just with pure macro and expand normally. What they're saying is that hatch first is superior to pool first vs 2-rax builds not that without it the game is literally impossible if you go pool first. Pool/gas first used to be mandatory simply because of the possibility of 10 rax/reaper + bunker rush which = dead 14 hatch, so there was no alternative. | ||
|
Samhax
1054 Posts
On December 07 2010 18:11 Zerokaiser wrote: The game looked a hell of a lot different a month ago. We played months without hatch first back when barracks didn't require a depot and Zealots had a shorter build time. Players are getting better, patches are coming out, strategies are being developed, and the same-old same-old just might not cut it anymore. The funny part, is they are telling us that they go hatch first to counter the 2 rax opener which was the counter to the hatch first lol. And JulyZerg did quite well with pool first in this GSL so pool first is not out of date. Edit: If you can't counter a 2rax opener with pool first then there is a balance issue and Blizzard have to fix it. | ||
|
Erectum
France194 Posts
| ||
|
NewteN
United States179 Posts
| ||
|
Azzur
Australia6259 Posts
On December 07 2010 18:16 teamsolid wrote: What they're saying is that hatch first is superior to pool first vs 2-rax builds not that without it the game is literally impossible if you go pool first. Pool/gas first used to be mandatory simply because of the possibility of 10 rax/reaper + bunker rush which = dead 14 hatch, so there was no alternative. Ok, this post gives a lot of clarity to Ret's quote. So, if people say "go pool first to counter 2-rax all-in", then they are completely wrong? Ret is not saying that pool first is not viable; rather, if your intention is to counter the 2-rax, then it is better to hatch first. In JulyZerg's case, if Ret and Idra's experiment is correct, his pool first opening is inferior to hatch first against a 2-rax opening. However, JulyZerg's probably uses his opening because it suits his style better. I thus want to focus on the 2nd part of Ret's statement: not to mention you have to blindly make ~20 lings in that case so if terran just stops after 5 mariens and puts down a CC you are economically fucked I feel the next phase of the TvZ matchup map explore this. Is it viable for the zerg to play safe blindly (e.g. pop down spines, make lings)? Would this set them back too much? Or would this result in an equal footing in the mid and lategame? | ||
|
MapleLeafSirup
Germany950 Posts
On December 07 2010 18:22 Erectum wrote: Someone as tried 11 pool against 2 rax pressure ? At high level i mean. That would be interesting for me as well. Maybe you mean this 11overpool build from THIS THREAD ?? With some variations this build got my standard build because you can copmpensate the problem which ret and idra stated: the lack of larva | ||
|
Azzur
Australia6259 Posts
On December 07 2010 18:22 Erectum wrote: Someone as tried 11 pool against 2 rax pressure ? At high level i mean. Idra and Ret did spend quite a bit of time investigating all the responses to the 2-rax all-in and found that hatch first came up on top. I would guess the korean zergs have done the same thing and maybe this is why all of them seem to want to hatch first. | ||
|
UniversalSnip
9871 Posts
| ||
|
Erectum
France194 Posts
On December 07 2010 18:27 MapleLeafSirup wrote: That would be interesting for me as well. Maybe you mean this 11overpool build from THIS THREAD ?? With some variations this build got my standard build because you can copmpensate the problem which ret and idra stated: the lack of larva Yup i am totally thinking about this thread ^^ | ||
|
Samhax
1054 Posts
On December 07 2010 18:29 Azzur wrote: Idra and Ret did spend quite a bit of time investigating all the responses to the 2-rax all-in and found that hatch first came up on top. I would guess the korean zergs have done the same thing and maybe this is why all of them seem to want to hatch first. I don't think so, koreans go hatch first without a spine crawler and they defend with drones and zerglings but Ret and Idra put a spine on the expansion and delay the queen. For them it's the safest build against 2 rax. So it isn't that obvious. I really think Koreans are greedy because hatch first give you a huge lead in the mid game because of the extra larva, that's why the terrans don't let them untouched and pressure/all-in. | ||
|
happyness
United States2400 Posts
On December 07 2010 17:08 TexSC wrote: It is quite amazing how quickly Artosis went from "If you went hatch first and they want to kill it, they can" to "if you place a spine crawler or two, with good ling control, you can fend it off every time." But yes, I agree, hatch first is what zergs have to do. They are a macro race, period. What's wrong with changing an opinion? Nobody's figured out this game yet. And people are quickly learning the ins and outs of the game, hence why they quickly change opinion | ||
|
ZpuX
Sweden1230 Posts
On December 07 2010 18:33 Samhax wrote: I don't think so, koreans go hatch first without a spine crawler and they defend with drones and zerglings but Ret and Idra put a spine on the expansion and delay the queen. For them it's the safest build against 2 rax. So it isn't that obvious. I really think Koreans are greedy because hatch first give you a huge lead in the mid game because of the extra larva, that's why the terrans don't let them untouched and pressure/all-in. The question is not how you follow up 14hatch, but rather if 14hatch is superior to any pool first/1 base builds... As I said in another thread, the pros are not perfect in any way. But when you combine the knowledge and skill of nestea, fruitdealer, idra, ret, haypro and their terran practice partners I am sure they would come up with more competent builds than the average tl.net user... | ||
|
Shikyo
Finland33997 Posts
On December 07 2010 18:07 Samhax wrote: Ret and Idra are really biased, it's not even funny. We played months (I'm a zerg, in case) without hatch first, now they are saying without hatch first you can't play zerg? Sorry but i don't buy it. Hatch first give you a strong lead in the mid-game if you are untouched, that's why terran hard pressure early and force a ton of zergling and maybe a spine, but when you don't go hatch first they can deal with it in the mid game just with pure macro and expand normally. Yep, the speedling opening that was standard for like 5 months is still completely strong and viable. Back then Terran could even BBS, I don't buy that SBB is harder to stop than BBS. | ||
|
Koshi
Belgium38799 Posts
I want to discuss something that I already said a million times already in all the live report threads: an INBASE hatchery. I am a Zerg player myself and I frown upon the stupidity of going 15 hatch on every map every time against Terran. When did TL and progamers decided that putting your first hatchery on your natural was the way Blizzard intended for Zerg to play this game? I have read the comments of Ret in the live report treads about not being able to keep up with a 2 baracks mass marine + scv push on a 1 base. Thus, he claimed that 15 hatchery was the only way to go. But the math has been done, in multiple threads, that it isn’t that bad to go an inbase hatchery. I have done it myself against and the results are positive: Mineralwise there is an acceptable loss, you can saturate your main very fast and the 100% certainty of Terran allin when you hatch on your natural makes it not that bad than you think. If you time 2 larvae rounds when you put your first expansion correctly and transfer 6 drones, you can INSTANTLY mine your natural for 80% (16 drones). But the mineralstory is the downside. There is also an upside, and I believe that the advantage does outplay the disadvantages of this build. One big advantage is diversity. Easy example, with putting that 15 hatch in your base you could get a fast extractor, skip you initial queen, get lair with your first 100 gas. This means you get lair when your pool finishes! And I know this is a gimmicky build. But it could be a build Z could use as the meta game changes. There are pressure builds as well coming from this inbase hatchery, like an insane timed roach push. I did this a couple times on scrap station and it works like a charm. You aren’t even vulnerable to banshees/void rays because you have a compact base with 2 queens anyway (if scouted you can make 2 more). And like I said, and you should remember this: - The mineral loss is ACCEPTABLE. - This game was not designed to 15 hatchery every freaking game. Also, getting bunkers on the bottom of your ramp is not that bad, because you can skip mass zerglings and tech to roach. Could Ret, Idra or someone who did intensive practicing on the early TvZ comment why there can't be an inbase hatch?? + Show Spoiler + If Rain brought his scv's, it would have been roflstomp anyway. Better control or not. | ||
|
pwadoc
271 Posts
| ||
|
Geo.Rion
7377 Posts
Could Ret, Idra or someone who did intensive practicing on the early TvZ comment why there can't be an ingame hatch?? Let's hope Ret posts and explains, Idra and like everybody else who's good are not posting on the strat forum since beta, respect for the exceptions | ||
|
MapleLeafSirup
Germany950 Posts
How long did it take for hundreds of BW protoss progamers and skilled amateurs in korea to find out that the bisu build is quite effective vs zerg ? Give it some time and don't give up | ||
| ||
|
|
BSL Open LAN 2025 - War…
RSL Revival
Classic vs TBD
WardiTV Invitational
Online Event
Afreeca Starleague
Barracks vs Mini
Wardi Open
Monday Night Weeklies
Sparkling Tuna Cup
LiuLi Cup
The PondCast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
