|
I have to disagree with Ret, even though he would whomp me in any game, but as stated, July Zerg and others go speed first into expo and it can turn out really well. Why is it so hard to believe that on a map like Steppes, with a tiny ramp, that the speedlings + spine crawlers cannot hold of a 2 rax push? Throw in an in-base hatch and you can do just fine. I know a lot of zergs are against building spines unless they have to, but I think that they do not use them enough. Look at Sen's play on the Day9 daily recently. He was able to use spines to great advantage and they never go out of style since you can move them as need be and they have outstanding range on a cliff (Not to mention they are like -1 food units). I really think that zergs got too greedy when the terrans lost their super fast proxy rax builds and now the terrans have adapted. Zerg must adapt as well and if that means playing it safer, that is what it means.
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.
|
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.
|
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.
|
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.
|
On December 07 2010 18:11 Zerokaiser wrote:Show nested quote +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.
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.
|
Someone as tried 11 pool against 2 rax pressure ? At high level i mean.
|
artosis is really pretty clueless too, just leave him out of it
|
On December 07 2010 18:16 teamsolid wrote:Show nested quote +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. 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?
|
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
|
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.
|
You know, this really sounds like an issue with the map pool to me.
|
On December 07 2010 18:27 MapleLeafSirup wrote:Show nested quote +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
Yup i am totally thinking about this thread ^^
|
On December 07 2010 18:29 Azzur wrote:Show nested quote +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.
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.
|
On December 07 2010 17:08 TexSC wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2010 17:01 Gotmog wrote: Jinro agrees as well. And i think Artosis would agree now as well, even though he was against it at the start of GSL (so was idra i believe) 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
|
On December 07 2010 18:33 Samhax wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2010 18:29 Azzur wrote: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. 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...
|
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.
|
Well, an admin closed my thread without even saying anything. Except a link to this thread. And this is something completely different. I am going to paste my previous post here, because I believe the admin says that this thread is the same as mine?
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.
|
I play zerg at around 2000 diamond, and I've found that the 11 overpool provides a lot of flexibility in holding off marines pushes/all ins. Just stopping the push is usually enough to win the game, as most terrans haven't thought much past the mass marine stage. The really scary play stems from the followups to marine pressure, taking advantage of the zerg scramble to defend against the marines to prepare a banshee followup or something along those lines. I've been trying out a third in-base hatch for extra larva production to allow me to pump lings and enough drones to keep up, and it works in some games. The idea is really to spend as little gas as possible. If you can fend off the marines with lings/crawlers without suiciding huge number of banelings you can sometimes make it to midgame.
|
i'm recommending trying out hatch first super fast roaches. The problem is if he uses a lot of scvs the T might be able to kill it before roaches could hatch but 3-4 roach and 1 queen does really well. I havent seen it at progamer level yet, but it works for me fairly often.
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
|
Sometimes solutions take months or even years to find.
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
|
|
|
|