|
On January 12 2011 00:20 Antiproduct wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2011 00:13 Sajuuk7 wrote:
I think many Zerg players would like to play aggressively, but that there is a problem. Protoss and Terran, accompanied by a selection of maps featuring ramp choke points, have an incredibly easy and strong way of walling off their base and not having to worry about early aggression much.
1 hold position Zealot can hold off 6 Zerglings.
1 Sentry can delay any push by lots of crucial time.
Marines standing safely behind buildings can shoot freely at the short range tier 1 Zerg units.
I believe it is simply a combination of Zerg having very short range tier 1 and the maps all having easy to fortify choke points. Notice how ZvZ is mainly Ling/Bling rushes? It's because Zerg can't wall everything off and have ranged units sitting behind 1000 hp buildings. Baneling Busts and 7RR are hardly viable against P or T due to their ease in predictability/scouting and counters.
If Zerg had either:
1. A cliff walking early game unit
2. A longer ranged tier 1 unit (ex. Hydra)
3. Maps with no ridiculous ramp choke points
Then they could maybe harass instead of always being the one harassed. I'm sorry but zerg has no reason to complain about the choke points. There are plenty of ways to harass as zerg. Learn to micro and actually use your units effectively. Use drops. Prevent expansions (zerglings or mutalisks are perfect for this), and spread creep. If you spread creep, harass will not be a problem. Not to mention zerg's constant unit reinforcement. Protoss can barely harass zerg at all. They can't even harass Terran. Protoss have powerful units, yes, but the only unit that is good for harass is a blink stalker. I really do not see why you complain about this.
Are you joking Sajuuk7 summed it up perfectly. Protoss can barely harass zerg at all?
ARE YOU JOKING???
Here are a few
10 gateway zealot rush
cannon rush
pylon ramp block into cannons
4 gate
list goes on...
|
On January 12 2011 12:40 ipwnN00bz wrote:
You obviously didnt read the post - the point was 1 hatch with a queen can match 4 gateways (or 4 raxes for that matter) in terms of larva - so if you NNEEEEEEDD the larva in the early game then there are other issues at play - the most likely being you arent getting 100% of the potential larva because of macro.
Hi  I've been reading this argument going back and forth and I think both sides are missing the point somewhat. The Zerg's need for two bases is more complex than just a raw comparison of larva production versus gateways, and the issue of early game aggression is also more subtle. It's about the choices Zerg has to make, the timings of those choices and the nature of its units.
Imagine you're Zerg and I'm Terran, and we're both one-basing. If we both build up an army, where do you want the fight between those armies to happen? Correct: out in the open, or within range of your excellent spine crawlers. Certainly not at my ramp. Straight away, there's a motive for Zerg to play defensively: unless your army is very much larger, aggression is unlikely to pay for itself. So you don't want to be aggressive if I'm building an army; you want to get on more bases and make a bigger army.
So ok: let's assume your one-base Zerg army is very much larger. Under what circumstances would that be true? Well, T and P physically can't overdrone, so we're talking tech or fast expansion. What kind of tech? If it's air units, like void rays or banshees - whoops! The only unit you have that can shoot those is back in your base. I guess you don't want to risk playing aggressively if I'm teching, either: you need to stay at home and - literally - cover all your bases by getting queens and teching to lair. And since you can't do both at the same time with one hatchery, you need an expansion.
That leaves fast-expanding as a reason for my T/P army being smaller and vulnerable to your Z army. And sure enough, forge FE is vulnerable to a well-timed two-base roach push (note the 'two') - so long as you're quite certain I'm not teching to air behind the expansion. If I'm Terran it's even more complicated: I like to expand off the back of early Marine aggression, which forces you to delay tech, cut drones and build precisely the kind of units that are a) most larva-intensive and b) least useful for subsequent aggression against my bunkered-up expansion.
Notice how everything points away from aggressive play and towards Zerg needing two bases, be it for larvae (mass zerglings), queens and lair (versus fast tech), gas for mutalisks and upgrades, economy so as to get ahead and have a chance of punishing a fast expansion... there're very few scenarios in which one base aggression is the clever choice as Zerg.
|
I hope there is some way around it to make Zerg more offensive in early game. Some good strategy, or at the very least some new units in heart of the swarm.
Maybe it's possible to go like 25 exp with macro hatch in main, and still get a decent economy. But in games where my economy isn't ahead, it's usually a loss. Feels a bit hopeless :p I think day[9] tried to get some good nydus strategies going, but.. it's not really that hard to scout it and so expensive. Will probably keep praying that my 14-16 hatch stays alive and that I can hold the 4-warp gate.
But maybe it makes sense like people say, an infestation growing at an exponential rate. Even so I can't help but think that the current Zerg strategies (more money) is simply a result of them being weaker, at least in early game. If they are weaker it's not nessecarily wrong, but it is a bit tedious.
|
That's funny every nonzerg player saying "that's cauz zerg don't know how to play", "that's cauz zerg believe in myth such as unit are not cost effective" etc.
But, as someone said in another thread, ZvZ is one of the most agressive match up, so it's not because zerg don't know how to play agressiv, it has more to do with terran & protoss defensive capacities.
|
I think if zerg was being played wrong someone would have cracked the code so to say and started being extremely succesfull with his newfound ace strategy concept by now, so it would quickly become standard.
As a zerg player, who thinks zerg is in fact being played right, i think our reactionary/ passive attitude in the early game is a sum of these factors, and more i have overlooked, feel free to add.
-Ability to expand relatively easy in the early game
-lack of mobile low tier anti-air unit
-early game map controll using fast and cheap lings for xel naga towers and to patrol enemy ramp
-early game map controll tends to lead towards expanding
-significant creep spread only possible in meta- game
-other races wall in
-...
|
On January 13 2011 00:04 Umpteen wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2011 12:40 ipwnN00bz wrote:
You obviously didnt read the post - the point was 1 hatch with a queen can match 4 gateways (or 4 raxes for that matter) in terms of larva - so if you NNEEEEEEDD the larva in the early game then there are other issues at play - the most likely being you arent getting 100% of the potential larva because of macro.
Hi I've been reading this argument going back and forth and I think both sides are missing the point somewhat. The Zerg's need for two bases is more complex than just a raw comparison of larva production versus gateways, and the issue of early game aggression is also more subtle. It's about the choices Zerg has to make, the timings of those choices and the nature of its units.
To be fair there are many points. One of the ones I'm interested in is having facts and knowing reasons for doing things.
If a person thinks "you need two bases because one hatchery doesn't have enough production for one-basing", that person is pretty much trapped -- that one piece of misinformation makes it very, very difficult to even conceive the notion of effective one-base play.
However, once someone can strike this misinformation from their head, they have a chance to learn correct reasons that favor two-base play, making it more likely they can do so effectively. (Okay, they could learn correct reasons along with flawed reasons, but....)
It also gives them the chance to understand one-base play better if they ever decide to experiment with it, or are otherwise forced into it by game considerations. With the bit of misinformation in their head, they become desperate to get up an expansion, or at least sink a lot of money into an in-base Hatchery. But with the knowledge corrected, they have a chance to do something else when it might be appropriate -- such going heavy Banelings, heavy Roaches, or spending the money on rapid tech followed by massing Mutalisks or Hydralisks.
|
Honestly, I'm convinced zerg can be played more aggressively if terran and protoss had more motivations to FE as well. What's the point of expanding instead of going for a 1 base army when your 1 base army is stronger than your opponents 1 base army, thus forcing him to expand and defend to avoid a 1 base vs. 1 base battle? Imagine you didn't have forcefields or your marauders didn't have slow, that's exactly how a 1 base zerg army feels to me. Maybe the units are cost-efficient, but they don't have any special abilities which could really kill your opponents army if they are not careful. You didn't pull your roaches/lings away in time? Enjoy getting raped by forcefields and slow.
But, if 1 base play was less viable, by - let's say - better maps, terran and protoss had to decide whether they want to get workers, tech or go for a low tech army as well, leaving zerg open with more aggressive potential.
|
I think it might be interesting to see what would happen if queen production could be overlapped with lair research. That way gas/pool/lair wouldn't be utterly starved for larvae, and it might be possible to hit some nice timings with burrow, contamination or overlord speed for scouting.
|
On January 12 2011 20:52 FluidTek wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2011 00:20 Antiproduct wrote:On January 12 2011 00:13 Sajuuk7 wrote:
I think many Zerg players would like to play aggressively, but that there is a problem. Protoss and Terran, accompanied by a selection of maps featuring ramp choke points, have an incredibly easy and strong way of walling off their base and not having to worry about early aggression much.
1 hold position Zealot can hold off 6 Zerglings.
1 Sentry can delay any push by lots of crucial time.
Marines standing safely behind buildings can shoot freely at the short range tier 1 Zerg units.
I believe it is simply a combination of Zerg having very short range tier 1 and the maps all having easy to fortify choke points. Notice how ZvZ is mainly Ling/Bling rushes? It's because Zerg can't wall everything off and have ranged units sitting behind 1000 hp buildings. Baneling Busts and 7RR are hardly viable against P or T due to their ease in predictability/scouting and counters.
If Zerg had either:
1. A cliff walking early game unit
2. A longer ranged tier 1 unit (ex. Hydra)
3. Maps with no ridiculous ramp choke points
Then they could maybe harass instead of always being the one harassed. I'm sorry but zerg has no reason to complain about the choke points. There are plenty of ways to harass as zerg. Learn to micro and actually use your units effectively. Use drops. Prevent expansions (zerglings or mutalisks are perfect for this), and spread creep. If you spread creep, harass will not be a problem. Not to mention zerg's constant unit reinforcement. Protoss can barely harass zerg at all. They can't even harass Terran. Protoss have powerful units, yes, but the only unit that is good for harass is a blink stalker. I really do not see why you complain about this. Are you joking Sajuuk7 summed it up perfectly. Protoss can barely harass zerg at all? ARE YOU JOKING??? Here are a few 10 gateway zealot rush cannon rush pylon ramp block into cannons 4 gate list goes on...
Dude... those are all-in/cheese, not really "Harassment". Harassment is applied pressure to force an opponent into a defensive mind-set that usually triggers very specific tech without committing much of your own resources to trigger it and without damaging yourself to the point where the strategy would have to win or score huge economic damage to your opponent or risk being overwhelmed quickly by your opponent's macro in the long run. Muta Harass often keeps Terran and Protoss players in their own base while committing sizable quantities of resources to constructing turrets or Photon Cannons often with just a commitment of 600 Minerals and 600 Gas on your part that you can continue to use around the map vs the static defenses that counter them. Reapers typically force a player to leave a number of moderately expensive units on defense. Protoss can drop a Darkshrine in the mid game without being "All In-ish" and force a terran player to pool Orbital energy for scans rather than spending it all on Mules. Phoenix Openings force a player to commit minerals and larva to Spore Crawlers or tech to Hydras and commit substantial quantities of gas to making hydras early in the game.
Anyways, more on-topic, the reason zerg play defensively is due to Protoss/Terran Wall-in capability and Zerg's almost complete reliance on one specific tech to break these walls in the early-mid game and the suicidal nature of the units involved. Aggressive Zerg plays are primarily focused around denying expansions while building up their own expos.
|
On January 12 2011 00:03 THE_oldy wrote:
Zerg are ment to slowly consume the map, and eventually overwhelm with pure numbers, and i think it fits there lore perfectly.
And yes they were designed this way, just look at there creep mechanic, and the way they are encouraged to expand (only 300 for hatch, and you need them for unit production) It's actually not "only" 300. With the drone it's 350. Then the Nexus and CC costs 400, but also give 11 or 10 supply while the hatch provides just 2 supply. The remaining 8 (or even 9) supply costs another 100 (or 112.5)
This means, that the hatch costs, included the drone and the overlord to get +10 supply comined, 450 minerals and thus is more expensive than a Nexus or CC. Then again, the hatch also functions as production building, so you save the minerals for a lot of raxes or gates.
Protoss however has both chronoboost as well as warp-in, the terran has access to a reactor for some units to accelerate production.
|
On January 13 2011 23:36 Conrose wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2011 20:52 FluidTek wrote:On January 12 2011 00:20 Antiproduct wrote:On January 12 2011 00:13 Sajuuk7 wrote:
I think many Zerg players would like to play aggressively, but that there is a problem. Protoss and Terran, accompanied by a selection of maps featuring ramp choke points, have an incredibly easy and strong way of walling off their base and not having to worry about early aggression much.
1 hold position Zealot can hold off 6 Zerglings.
1 Sentry can delay any push by lots of crucial time.
Marines standing safely behind buildings can shoot freely at the short range tier 1 Zerg units.
I believe it is simply a combination of Zerg having very short range tier 1 and the maps all having easy to fortify choke points. Notice how ZvZ is mainly Ling/Bling rushes? It's because Zerg can't wall everything off and have ranged units sitting behind 1000 hp buildings. Baneling Busts and 7RR are hardly viable against P or T due to their ease in predictability/scouting and counters.
If Zerg had either:
1. A cliff walking early game unit
2. A longer ranged tier 1 unit (ex. Hydra)
3. Maps with no ridiculous ramp choke points
Then they could maybe harass instead of always being the one harassed. I'm sorry but zerg has no reason to complain about the choke points. There are plenty of ways to harass as zerg. Learn to micro and actually use your units effectively. Use drops. Prevent expansions (zerglings or mutalisks are perfect for this), and spread creep. If you spread creep, harass will not be a problem. Not to mention zerg's constant unit reinforcement. Protoss can barely harass zerg at all. They can't even harass Terran. Protoss have powerful units, yes, but the only unit that is good for harass is a blink stalker. I really do not see why you complain about this. Are you joking Sajuuk7 summed it up perfectly. Protoss can barely harass zerg at all? ARE YOU JOKING??? Here are a few 10 gateway zealot rush cannon rush pylon ramp block into cannons 4 gate list goes on... Dude... those are all-in/cheese, not really "Harassment". Harassment is applied pressure to force an opponent into a defensive mind-set that usually triggers very specific tech without committing much of your own resources to trigger it and without damaging yourself to the point where the strategy would have to win or score huge economic damage to your opponent or risk being overwhelmed quickly by your opponent's macro in the long run. Muta Harass often keeps Terran and Protoss players in their own base while committing sizable quantities of resources to constructing turrets or Photon Cannons often with just a commitment of 600 Minerals and 600 Gas on your part that you can continue to use around the map vs the static defenses that counter them. Reapers typically force a player to leave a number of moderately expensive units on defense. Protoss can drop a Darkshrine in the mid game without being "All In-ish" and force a terran player to pool Orbital energy for scans rather than spending it all on Mules. Phoenix Openings force a player to commit minerals and larva to Spore Crawlers or tech to Hydras and commit substantial quantities of gas to making hydras early in the game. Anyways, more on-topic, the reason zerg play defensively is due to Protoss/Terran Wall-in capability and Zerg's almost complete reliance on one specific tech to break these walls in the early-mid game and the suicidal nature of the units involved. Aggressive Zerg plays are primarily focused around denying expansions while building up their own expos.
Let me quote you:
"Harassment is applied pressure to force an opponent into a defensive mind-set that usually triggers very specific tech without committing much of your own resources to trigger it and without damaging yourself to the point where the strategy would have to win or score huge economic damage to your opponent or risk being overwhelmed quickly by your opponent's macro in the long run."
So what do you call a pylon/cannon contain? Thats cheap as hell and puts the zerg in a 1 base defensive contain which forces the zerg to either spine+ creep spread or banelings or roaches. Or double 12 gate pressure with a few zealots. In both situations the toss forces the zerg into a defensive position and they have to overcommit otherwise they risk loosing the game instantly, where the toss can then freely fast expand and the game isn't look to bright for the zerg.
|
Yes, and mostly because the only harass that consistently is mutalisk harass, but sometimes roach/hydra is better due to map/positioning/etc. and wasting gas is never good. So, if you don't go muta/ling/bling, you need to simply get the biggest econ advantage anyway so that you can produce the units AND the reinforcements (flimsy lings) that you need in order to take the game. There are other reasons, like if you look at Zerg buildings and mechanics, the reward for FE or expanding in general is two-fold compared to Terran or Protoss, you get more potential income, and more production, plus as a bonus, it is cheaper by 100 minerals. Sure they are weak on the defense, but only because you need to get the econ advantage by droning so hard. The only reason Zerg might not need more production is if you can kill the Terran/Protoss army out right, and by then either you're one-basing, they're doin' it wrong, or you've already taken a good chunk of the map. In SC1 however, yes they did harass frequently, but in SC2, Terran is the one built to harass (reapers, hellions, cloak-able banshees, AND healing drop ships, I mean what more could there be), and often they will and try to PREVENT the Zerg from gaining an econ advantage. Protoss, on the other hand, has few harass units (even counting the gimmicky DT), and so they try to macro harder than the Zerg, attempting to keep a probe advantage, while not letting the Zerg pressure them, but they can make workers and military at the same time, so they usually can even pressure the Zerg. Notice a trend, not "defend the Zerg's harass," but "harass the Zerg."
*gasp* Wow, I feel like I just ranted more than explained, but meh.
TL;DR Terran harasses Zerg, and Protoss keeps pressure with units while "droning" hardish, and Zerg can expand for cheaper than other races, and needs money for reinforcements, so Zerg needs to replace drones (if lost), and Expo a lot, so they drone/macro more than other races. Well, usually.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
