EPTYou can theorycraft all you want about how the zerg out to have attacked immediately after 200/200 and whatever else, but in reality that isn't always viable, and certainly doesn't always happen.
Break 200 Food Limit (as Zerg)-"Oversupply-Trick" - Page 3
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
iSTime
1579 Posts
You can theorycraft all you want about how the zerg out to have attacked immediately after 200/200 and whatever else, but in reality that isn't always viable, and certainly doesn't always happen. | ||
|
Yotta
United States270 Posts
On February 21 2011 03:49 morimacil wrote: Well the problem here with your assumptions is that you are looking at it in situations in which nothing will work. If you reach 200 supply as your opponent has a 190 supply void ray colossus deathball, you are dead. If you both max out at the same time, you are dead. If he maxes out before you, you are dead. So of course, in all of those situations, getting to 220 food, or 260 food, or what ever, isnt really going to work. But in all of those situations, very little is going to work. Thats the point you should be considering something like this, or a 300 food push, and so on. There are quite a few situations where you may for example max out while your opponent is at 160 food or so, or have the ability to max out while he is still there, but cant actually attack him. Sure enough, you may have a supply advantage at that point, but if you decide to attack through a choke into a PF and sieged tanks, with vikings, turrets and bunkers, then the fact that you have a supply advantage is quite irrelevant here, since an attack would be suicidal. So yeah, in cases where your opponent maxes out before you, or at the same time as you, you will lose if he knew what he was doing. In cases where you max out, and your opponent doesnt have some kind of defensive advantage, then you can just go and kill him. No point in making a 220 food army, or a 300 food push. But in cases where you max out first, and have an advantage, but cant actually just go and kill him, well then you have to be inefficient. Attacking into an entrenched position with your freshly maxed army is going to be inefficient. 300 food pushing him is also inefficient. Going to 220, or more supply, is also going to be inefficient. But in cases like those, since all of your options are inefficient, you just stop caring about what is efficient or not, and instead start caring about what is effective. Stuff like dropping 20 banelings on a planetary fortress. Inefficient ressource wise, but highly effective. In short, anytime you would consider a 300 food push, thats when you should consider this. Not as a goal in every game, but as a useful tactic. And imo, this is superior to a 300 food push. Or a 300 food defense. Instead of fighting with ~140 supply of army, remaxing, and fighting again with ~140 supply of army, fighting with 200 supply, directly is going to be a lot more effective. Having your first army being 50% bigger, that makes it exponentially more effective. A 200 supply army is just way more brutal than 2x 140 food armies. And ofc, the best would probably be a 200 supply army, followed by instantly remaxing, and so another 140 supply wave coming right after. The 350 food push  And my argument is that the inefficiency of this technique puts you so far behind that it nullifies your economic advantage and allows the enemy player to catch up, matching or surpassing your surplus production and putting you at an unnecessary disadvantage. For every 20 supply you make beyond 200, even with your late game economic advantage, enemy players should be able to match you at least 1:1. It's better to be ahead by 40 when they have 160 than it is to be ahead by 40 when they have 200 (200/160 > 240/200) I guess we can't really know who's right until people start testing it but I have a strong feeling this will have little to no use in high level play. On February 21 2011 04:36 PJA wrote: Why are people theorycrafing situations where the zerg maxes, the protoss maxes soon after, and the zerg has to wait a long time to build up the resources to do this? Even at the top level, zerg players spend a ton of time at 200/200 with 2k+ minerals. You can theorycraft all you want about how the zerg out to have attacked immediately after 200/200 and whatever else, but in reality that isn't always viable, and certainly doesn't always happen. I've said it already but I'll say it again, you can't assume people will make mistakes in theorycrafting because you can't predict their mistakes. As people get better play should approach theoretically optimal play and that's what I'm arguing about. | ||
|
dementrio
678 Posts
| ||
|
Ageless
United States67 Posts
On February 21 2011 01:08 morimacil wrote: Its already been discussed in other threads. Its usually better to do it with spine crawlers, it costs a little more upfront, but it gives you an extra 20 seconds of build time, which can be crucial time. Telling 60 drones to build 60 crawlers, and then having them get to the place, and actually start building takes a surprisingly long time. If you tell them to build spines instead, while the initial cost is slightly higher, you have more time. And if some of them do morph into spines before you can cancel, well having a bunch of spines in the middle of the map, or spread out at each base, is usually a lot more useful than having extra spore cralwers around. Nope, thats wrong. You are pulling a large amount of drones off mining. for 50-100 seconds. Doing this costs you thousands of minerals and gas, even if you just bring all your drones together, run them around for a bit, and then send them back. the money lost by canceling buildings is just the tip of the iceberg. If you are maxed with extra money then yoiu don't really need it anyway. I think this could be better than losing with 3000 in the bank. | ||
|
Yotta
United States270 Posts
On February 21 2011 04:47 dementrio wrote: If you have ~1-2k extra minerals (5-10 supply with this) when you hit 200/200 with nothing else to spend money on (upgrades?) then this might be a viable option to mitigate the effects of mistakes you've made There's still the lost mining time and a weaker 300 food push, but it could be situationally better to do this. If you're waiting around for enough money to get 20,40, or 60 food (4-10k minerals to begin production) over as some have suggested in this thread then you're falling behind.This is useful if you are maxed and need to e.g. get a few brood lords. however getting 10 extra roaches or something like that is not that useful as what you need to worry about is trading armies while staying maxed, and it's not really practical to use this to consistently stay at 220/200 | ||
|
Cyanocyst
2222 Posts
Tho a Zerg army wasn't really meant to stand and fight a late game Terran or Toss army. Sure the 300 food push had a time where it worked well, but back then Terran and Toss players weren't playing for the late game. Thats why people perceived the Zerg late game to be strong. As Crazy as it may sound, i feel Zerg need to be the Aggressive race come late game. Zerg has: The Most transport methods, Typically faster units, Most map awareness, cheaper units, and the best production capacity. All these aspects lend themselves to being aggressive. Late game Zerg, should really be trying to abuse movement plays. Hitting a series of points simultaneously, to break your opponents defensive posture. Making good trades for your cheaper easier to produce units. This doesn't mean a Zerg shouldn't be expanding, as they are now. Its more a different stylistic way utilize the Zerg late game army. | ||
|
DarkGeneral
Canada328 Posts
| ||
Daigomi
South Africa4316 Posts
On February 21 2011 03:02 DarKFoRcE wrote: I can see this having some rare uses, but in general you should attack when you get close to or arrive at 200 supply. if you wait at 200 until you have harvested another ~3k minerals (1.5k for the spore crawlers and another 1.5k to spend on, for example, corruptors) it will actually give you a worse result in most cases than just attacking immidiately, because protoss can catch up in supply during this time. and no matter what, 220 zerg supply still doesnt win against 200 of protoss (assuming somewhat equal tech etc.) Correct me if I'm wrong, but in many situations Zergs aren't able to choose when to attack. In the Morrow games, Nightend turtled quite hard and only moved out when Morrow had 3000 minerals stored up. In situations where Zerg can't get a good attacking position, a trick like this might be useful. That said, I'm not convinced this will be used in top level play. | ||
|
Ruyguy
Canada988 Posts
| ||
|
Cite
Australia251 Posts
One example I can think of is just recently in the FXOpen it was Glade vs oGsSupernova it was on Shakuras and Glade was on Brood tech waiting to get them with massive bank. Where he could have used this trick he instead suicided his mutas which were doing soo much for him to help pump out some broods. Sure it might not have won him the game but getting those broods out about 30s-1min quicker while having the 8 broodlords of mutas in supply he sac'd earlier - I think it would have atleast had quite a good impact on the outcome. To the people saying you're loosing 3000k onwards in bank - how? If anything if you are quick at doing your things (Which in all likeliness this trick will only see most potential at higher levels of play) you should be getting back 75% of that within a couple seconds of even having to do the trick. For the people saying you probably won't be sitting at such big numbers - You probably will if you are at late late game especially on some of the newer maps where you are just waiting on engaging the enemy's deathball chances are you should be sitting on as much larvae and mins as you can to repop instantly anyways... *edit: by the way I figured if you do take the time to execute the trick as you build spines its probably easier to shift+# add em into a ctrl group or add em all to a control group after building em (before popping units) to make it that much faster to execute the cancellation. | ||
|
DarKFoRcE
Germany1215 Posts
On February 21 2011 05:38 Daigomi wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong, but in many situations Zergs aren't able to choose when to attack. In the Morrow games, Nightend turtled quite hard and only moved out when Morrow had 3000 minerals stored up. In situations where Zerg can't get a good attacking position, a trick like this might be useful. That said, I'm not convinced this will be used in top level play. Well, one of morrows biggest mistakes in general is that he does not get drop earlier, which results him in not being able to attack once he hits 200 quite often. i am pretty sure that you get to 200 supply as zerg vs protoss you absolutely need to start attacking in some way. and if you cannot attack via a normal ground attack (shakuras for example) then you need the drop upgrade ready in time. | ||
|
freetgy
1720 Posts
On February 21 2011 05:47 Cite wrote: *edit: by the way I figured if you do take the time to execute the trick as you build spines its probably easier to shift+# add em into a ctrl group or add em all to a control group after building em (before popping units) to make it that much faster to execute the cancellation. double click or control click selects all building spines, one click on ESC cancels all of them this can be done fast, thus any "time" argument not really justified.(you could also put them in a control group i think) If you have the money to do it, there is imho few reasons to not do it, i mean having more units now is most times better (when you are going to fight) then having alittle more later you could also view it as a early 300food push: so instead of attacking with 120 Army + and replenishing constantly with 100 food during the engagement. You engage with a 160 food army and replenish with with 60 food. The main difference would be that you initial Army should be way more deadlier. and my gamesense at least says to me that a bigger army will deal more damage and receive fewer losses than a the smaller one (thus making it possibly more efficient, and make up for the "wasted" ressources) Again i don't want to judge which one is better but situational i can see it giving good results. @darkforce i agree with u in general, dropping is strong as zerg if done right. my idea is not a general strategy/goal, just another tool that might have his place in special situations. | ||
|
junemermaid
United States981 Posts
On February 21 2011 05:11 Yotta wrote: If you have ~1-2k extra minerals (5-10 supply with this) when you hit 200/200 with nothing else to spend money on (upgrades?) then this might be a viable option to mitigate the effects of mistakes you've made There's still the lost mining time and a weaker 300 food push, but it could be situationally better to do this. If you're waiting around for enough money to get 20,40, or 60 food (4-10k minerals to begin production) over as some have suggested in this thread then you're falling behind. You're talking like its rare for a zerg player to get to 200/200 without a huge amount of minerals in the bank. It's not a question of if, but of when. Yes, I realized you've made a case for "optimal play", but that has yet to be seen. With the current data-set, I haven't seen a zerg that wasn't hemorrhaging money when they are maxed. Spending it on upgrades is only going to sink about 200/200 every 3 minutes. It's not exactly taxing on the income. You can't argue for a future that may or may not have a more streamlined spending of resources. As is, taking into account top level zergs, this is a very potent ability to be able to get extra units. An extra 10 supply of roaches isn't that much, but if you look at an extra 10 supply of banelings (or even 20), you're looking at 5 (or 10) overlords filled to the brim with banelings. That will definitely be able to turn the tide of a battle. | ||
|
junemermaid
United States981 Posts
On February 21 2011 05:30 DarkGeneral wrote: A quick question, if this was remotely viable, wouldn't it have been a dominant strategy in BW? Much harder to pull off in BW because you'd be battling the UI to actually make the buildings. With SC2 you can just select a bunch of drones and queue up structures. | ||
|
Sek-Kuar
Czech Republic593 Posts
At least its an option, for sure there are situations where this could be really helpful. Considering the fact that in this game outcome of battles sometimes lies on absence/presence of single unit... Small example: 10 Mutas beat 15 Marines with ~3 Mutas suriviving, 16 marines beat 10 Mutas with ~6 Marines surviving. Presence of one more Colossus in lategame battle can be difference between crushing defeat and glorious victory... ...then difference between 200 food and 240 food can be game changing. Also we dont know that 240 food zerg army dont have chance vs 200 food Protoss army, we only know outcome of 200 vs 200. However once getting exploited, I believe it will be fixed as it is clearly bug | ||
|
Kovaz
Canada233 Posts
It's situational, sure, but kudos to the OP for some creative thinking. | ||
|
BuzzCraftTV
United States42 Posts
low ish currently masters Zerg putting this on my list of things i need to remember to do more, right next to baiting any fight i think looks "too even" close enough to my worker line to pull them in to make it "way unfair" :-D | ||
|
morimacil
France921 Posts
Why is everyone in this thread making such a stupid comments like "its useless" etc. That seems to be a general trend around here, anytime anyone suggests the possibility of anything, a bunch of ppl are instantly there to comment on how it will never work. About 50% of the comments on every thread are just explaining how the strategy will never work because it can be countered; In every thread. A quick question, if this was remotely viable, wouldn't it have been a dominant strategy in BW? Afaik, in BW, a terran or toss couldnt sit on 2 bases and max out a 200/200 army while letting zerg get 7 bases uncontested, and still have a fighting chance. So different game, different situation. If your opponent is actively trying to stop you from taking over the whole map, is forced to actually expand, giving you multiple places you can attack/drop, and you have dark swarm to bust down a front, then you just dont get in a situation where you are on 6-7 bases, and still cant break a turtling terran/toss trying to max on 2 bases. | ||
|
Offhand
United States1869 Posts
On February 21 2011 04:47 dementrio wrote: This is useful if you are maxed and need to e.g. get a few brood lords. however getting 10 extra roaches or something like that is not that useful as what you need to worry about is trading armies while staying maxed, and it's not really practical to use this to consistently stay at 220/200 I think the idea is that it bolsters the food count of your initial army without the zerg player actually sacrificing drones (which are useful latter). It saves larva as well, sac'd drones would need to be reproduced later to keep up mining. Assuming both players have around 80 workers, a 140 army is going to be a lot scarier in the initial exchange which is quite often the moment of truth for the non-zerg player. Assuming you don't put that extra food count into something like lings, I think it would make the exchange much more favorable. All ranged units scale favorably as their numbers increase, so the initial force is a lot stronger. | ||
|
PlosionCornu
Italy814 Posts
On February 21 2011 05:27 Cyanocyst wrote: Personally i feel that Zergs are thinking about the late game the wrong way. They keep thinking about trying to get the right unit composition / economy to fund those units. Tho a Zerg army wasn't really meant to stand and fight a late game Terran or Toss army. Sure the 300 food push had a time where it worked well, but back then Terran and Toss players weren't playing for the late game. Thats why people perceived the Zerg late game to be strong. As Crazy as it may sound, i feel Zerg need to be the Aggressive race come late game. Zerg has: The Most transport methods, Typically faster units, Most map awareness, cheaper units, and the best production capacity. All these aspects lend themselves to being aggressive. Late game Zerg, should really be trying to abuse movement plays. Hitting a series of points simultaneously, to break your opponents defensive posture. Making good trades for your cheaper easier to produce units. This doesn't mean a Zerg shouldn't be expanding, as they are now. Its more a different stylistic way utilize the Zerg late game army. And then the protoss/terran builds a single pylon/depot while rolls over your hatcheries. | ||
| ||
