EPTcolossi? void rays? no. only perfect timings and builds... sry guys but zerg needs an MC not balance
GSL Finals Analysis (Spoilers Obviously) - Page 2
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
Suxces
Germany103 Posts
colossi? void rays? no. only perfect timings and builds... sry guys but zerg needs an MC not balance | ||
|
theBOOCH
United States832 Posts
First of all, it seems like the major game decisions were almost always in MC's control. The four games that July lost related to him not having enough information to respond accurately to MC who always made the first move. The one game MC lost related to MC not having enough information about July's strategy. But, MC never gathered any more relevant information on July in any of his games and never suffered for it because he always carried the initiative (I'm really struggling for a vocabulary here). So basically, I feel that July's lack of strategic flexibility (whether it is built into the game, or July's shortcoming) coupled with MC's vast strategic flexibility is what made the match incredibly lopsided, and I'm not sure how much this can be faulted on July. Certainly, MC should be commended for taking advantage of powerful strategies, but when did July have the option to pursue any similar strategy that would put the impetus on MC to adapt to his gameplay? Baneling busts and Roach rushes both do that to some extent, but they are relatively all-in strategies. Don't you think that, especially in the time-frame that those games happened, it seems like Zerg's lack of strategic flexibility and Protoss' wealth of strategic flexibility are what make Zerg disadvantaged (but certainly not handicapped) in this match-up? Secondly, if forcefields were completely unnecessary for MC's success in any game in this series, then isn't the fact that MC still used them to gain an advantage in almost all of those games simply just an indicator of how Protoss has an advantage on top of an advantage? If forcefields have the ability to make a bad situation for the Zerg even just that much worse without detracting from the efficacy of the Protoss' strategy, doesn't that just show how powerful they really can be? It just seems to show that they are no risk and all gain in the situations in which they were used in those games, and that's what I think people are really responding to when they scream imbalance. | ||
|
drgonzhere
United States447 Posts
Regarding FF's It's my opinion that it takes a good player to utilize FF's correctly, and it also takes a good player to dodge or mitigate FF's the best they can. It is a micro technique that is entirely skill based on both sides. And honestly is there any question that July "outplayed but lost" to MC? MC is the best protoss on the planet and July's true skill level remains to be seen, but I would not place him close to people like Idra or Nestea. The better player won the GSL, stop complaining about FF's and balance. | ||
|
Buruguduy
Philippines238 Posts
The other four... well, he had no idea what july was going to throw at him. Just hope zerg has more scouting options. It would be okay if P had limited openings.. but there's just so much crap Z has to prepare for. And sacrificing an overlord works... if the map is small. Otherwise it's too difficult to know what the P is doing. | ||
|
babysimba
10466 Posts
Zerg not only has to guess when their attacks are coming, he has to guess what tech choice protoss is going. If you zerg users use hydras often, you will know that July is actually hoping is to aim for a very vulnerable period when toss tech up. This timing window is very small, but it is also the only period hydras are very strong in. Unfortunately, MC just didn't want to tech up that quickly and went for an aggressive approach instead. Many of you have asked why doesn't July goes for burrow roaches to be safe against 6gates all-in. And what happen if MC decides to goes for stargate tech too, building just a void ray for map control, delaying zerg's 3rd, while he himself goes expand to 3rd and turtle on 3 bases (with cannons for detection). RO32 MC vs July. This is the result of what will happen. Many of you think that July got crushed by macro in that game, but there's a deeper reason lying behind it. All these are due to imperfect information due to the scouting capabilities of zerg. Right now PvZ can be summarised into the following few points: 1. Scout 2. Believe in the info of what you have scouted, pray that toss doesn't mindf**k you. Macro approach Drone up as much as possible Pray toss doesn't attack you sooner than you expected. Examples: You think toss is going for an attack right after his +1 is completed, but he decides to cut probes and neglect all upgrades for a faster attack with more units. Also MC vs July Finals game 1 Aggressive approach Drone up, build an army with all resources and attack when you think toss is at a vulnerable phase. Pray that toss doesn't go army based and kills you before you can go aggressive.Pray that toss doesn't tech slower than expected (more defensive). Examples: The rest of MC vs July Finals games | ||
|
Jumbled
1543 Posts
On March 20 2011 16:05 MrBitter wrote: So wait... Your analysis is that forcefield was a non-factor in these games? Seriously? Are you trolling, or are you really that dense? It would be nice if you could offer something to the thread other than "You're a retard, forcefield was what won it." The OP's argument is that MC had a definite army size advantage in most of these battles, and that was the biggest factor in his win. Obviously we don't have replays to exactly compare supplies and army values, but I'd say that's an accurate assessment for many of the matches. I do feel that forcefield was important in some situations in these games, however. In particular, the situations in which MC was able to achieve a lot with only a few forcefields. This includes the chokepoint engagements in game 4, and forcefielding the main ramp in a couple of his gateway timing attacks. While I feel MC had enough units to win in those 4- and 6-gate attacks even without blocking the ramp, preventing reinforcements does make it much easier. The only real options for anyone (not just zerg) against a protoss attack like this is to either engage earlier so that the protoss can't control the ramp, or to sacrifice the expansion. Game 4 was very close, and good forcefielding was probably one of the keys that won it for MC, given that he was engaging hydras with pure gateway. That said, the forcefields depended on MC being very cunning in luring July forward into chokepoints, and could easily have failed if July hadn't overextended. | ||
bkrow
Australia8532 Posts
His loss had nothing to do with FF or any other protoss goodness, Is incorrect; because despite July failing in multiple ways.. None of those failures would have been completely game ending if not for MCs FF control | ||
|
Dommk
Australia4865 Posts
| ||
|
icezar
Germany240 Posts
I do feel that it is impossible to scout everything as zerg and the fact that zerg does not hae an all around good unit like marine and stalker makes it deadly. I feel the problem is with the hydra, they are too late and too slow. Also i found the fact that Protoss can make probes faster than Zerg can make drones to be ridiculous. Zerg cannot be aggressive in the begining without allin-ing. | ||
|
Schnullerbacke13
Germany1199 Posts
| ||
|
raf3776
United States1904 Posts
| ||
|
ZeeMan
Australia66 Posts
| ||
|
Figgy
Canada1788 Posts
On March 20 2011 16:05 MrBitter wrote: So wait... Your analysis is that forcefield was a non-factor in these games? Seriously? Are you trolling, or are you really that dense? This. MC's FFs were sick and def the best in the world, won him the games. You know Sentries are GOOD when they are beating Hydras without support sans game 3. | ||
|
Staboteur
Canada1873 Posts
As a zerg (read: Biased :D) it feels like Protoss gets to freely dictate the matchup, with Zerg having to prepare or scout for a large number of timings, pushes, and tech without much worrisome tech of their own to have the protoss be afraid of. It feels like Zerg is the underdog regardless, and though you can say "Oh he could have won had he just done -blah-", he could have easily just done -blah- and lost because what he just prepared for didn't actually come. So though it is neat to do an analysis like this, it feels like an unfair analysis because it is easy to say "he should have overlord scouted!" when for one it could just get denied before it actually finds what it is looking for, and for two there are so many timing windows that there are a whole bunch of times it would be good to send an overlord, and for three you could scout something and he could just... well, not do it and not be very behind for it. I sincerely believe that Protoss is extremely favoured in this matchup. I also believe that this fact doesn't matter for anyone not at the top level of play. If protoss is overpowered, matchmaking will compensate, overrating Protoss players, meaning that they're playing people better than themselves but still able to compete because of the strength of their race* *Not saying all protoss players suck! Just presenting a hypothetical possibility! | ||
|
babysimba
10466 Posts
In other games, july had close to pefect timing on when to send in his OLs, he just didn't manage to scout what he wants. Zerg has to decide on his own tech before OL speed can be upgraded. It will be too late to decide after upgraded OL has scouted everything. It's too easy to mindf*k zerg as toss due to low costs of production buildings required for an all-in. Yes chronoboost is no doubt the strongest macro mechanic in the game in toss context. Keeping up with eco, upgrading tech faster than other races, ability to increase production of units (whether its for tech switches or for all-in). What more do you want as toss? If you give toss mules and scans instead of chronoboost, i bet it will be a nerf instead. Edit: I don't see MC losing much in the near future. Ever since GSL 3, i have seen him as an abuser. He abuses protoss' strengths to the maximum. To be fair, it's just his way of playing - efficiency. He's definitely the best protoss out there, but as a spectator i don't see it as exciting. It's not difficult to micro at his level while being able to keep up with macro as toss compared to terran for example (means that relatively lower level of skills are needed to play the race at top tier compared to terran). Just imagine how much potential terran still has left, Nada's macro combine with MKP's micro combine with MVP's game understanding on when to exploit timing windows), but this requires godlike amount of apm and game sense. | ||
|
Dommk
Australia4865 Posts
On March 20 2011 18:23 Staboteur wrote: Cool thread. As a zerg (read: Biased :D) it feels like Protoss gets to freely dictate the matchup, with Zerg having to prepare or scout for a large number of timings, pushes, and tech without much worrisome tech of their own to have the protoss be afraid of. It feels like Zerg is the underdog regardless, and though you can say "Oh he could have won had he just done -blah-", he could have easily just done -blah- and lost because what he just prepared for didn't actually come. So though it is neat to do an analysis like this, it feels like an unfair analysis because it is easy to say "he should have overlord scouted!" when for one it could just get denied before it actually finds what it is looking for, and for two there are so many timing windows that there are a whole bunch of times it would be good to send an overlord, and for three you could scout something and he could just... well, not do it and not be very behind for it. I sincerely believe that Protoss is extremely favoured in this matchup. I also believe that this fact doesn't matter for anyone not at the top level of play. If protoss is overpowered, matchmaking will compensate, overrating Protoss players, meaning that they're playing people better than themselves but still able to compete because of the strength of their race* *Not saying all protoss players suck! Just presenting a hypothetical possibility! Well a particular style dictates a certain response. Zerg being a reactive race obviously relies reading into whatever the other race is doing, but it isn't like Zerg is incapable of dictating what the other race must do. For example, If Zerg goes ling/baneling then everything Protoss does is completely dictated by Zerg. There is no way to tell if Zerg has gone Ling/Baneling or has gone regular passive macro approach until the moment you can scout (or by moving out and dieing, but then it is game over anyway). If you 3gate expand for instance and shark mode without an observer or hallucinate scout it is entirely possible to lose the game straight away because you did not expect that many lings, you are playing blind from the very start and you don't have any idea what you should be doing until 8-9mins into the game where hallucination is available. It is only after you have a clear idea of what Zerg is doing that Protoss can then do what he needs to do. If Zerg has gone heavy roach then they must delay tech and get some Immortals out much faster. If Zerg has gone for baneling drops and the Protoss has no Cannons or tried to tech then he loses the game The race that is the most aggressive obviously dictates how the game flows, the vast majority of Zergs play a passive/reactive style but say if you went for heavy Roach aggression, are Protoss's actions from that point not dictated by what Zerg does? If Zerg goes muta, Protoss cannot just keep going to Colossus without worrying, they must switch tech to High Templar, Cannon up and get Blink ASAP. If Zerg goes heavy ling and takes a gold base, then it is upon the Protoss to stop them. If Zerg has too many Corruptors then you cannot keep going Colossus, you have to switch to Immortal/Templar. As Protoss, you cannot just stay in your base and do a one base Colossus push and succeed, all without worrying about what Zerg is doing, you will lose virtually every time. If you are playing a completely passive/reactive style then you will lose games because the other person completely ticked you, reading too much or too little into what he is going to be doing will sometimes get you losses, and honestly you shouldn't be expecting someone who isn't as good as MC to be able to perfectly read someone that is as good as MC every time. I remember White-ra doing a fake Expand into 4gate against Idra, but IdrA caught on very quickly, but someone who isn't as good as Idra or White-ra would have just lost. It has just gotten to a point where Protoss has a clear gameplan that they can do to be safe against things that worries them when playing against Zerg that doesn't put them terribly behind. I admit that sometimes it isn't clear what Protoss is doing, but Protoss is the same way about Zerg. If you always knew that Phoenixes were coming, if it was a fake expand into 4gate, if Zerg was going to 6pool, if Zerg wanted to baneling bust, if Zerg wanted to do heavy 2base Roach all-ins then honestly you would not lose to any of it. The last part I'm not going to bother addressing because honestly it is pure vitriol | ||
|
TyrantPotato
Australia1541 Posts
the saddest thing atm is the people defending FF are barking just as loudly as those claiming it to be OP. the TC just created a huge post for defending FF. however he wanted to be credited with something therefore created a new thread instead of posting in th ecurrent imbawhine threads, | ||
|
Charon1979
Austria317 Posts
None of them ist "omg FF OP!", although i have to admit that they are in fact responsible for a undeserved amount of "free" dmg. 1) Protoss timing attacks are extremely hard to hold off. There ist just one "correct" reaction to a well executed 6 gate. If you scout it to late or a little bit off timing, you lose. 2) Hydras just suck. Plain and simple. Everytime the zerg techs to hydra, Protoss has a huge mobility advantage. You cant attack without creep and you cant defend because (blink)stalkers just outrun you. 3) Protoss fast exe is (especially on large GSL maps) nearly undeniable with a late pool. You have just 2 choices. Going all in (not exactly the "safe" way... here you can QQ about 2 - 3 sentries just stopping an army) or expand yourself. On some maps/positions you just cant take a quick 3rd "safe", 4) Protoss just dictates the entire game without even really having to know what the zerg is doing. He already knows. There are not a whole lot of possible zerg answers and not a whole lot of possible units. A "missed" spire doesnt have the same impact as not scouting all 6 gateways and having to wonder if he is going to have a robo or not | ||
|
Azuroz
Sweden1630 Posts
On March 20 2011 16:28 Suxces wrote: MC > July colossi? void rays? no. only perfect timings and builds... sry guys but zerg needs an MC not balance this. But really you have to give MC credit for being as good as he is, it's siomply a factor of MC having figured out his own race better than any other player right now, he abused new and interesting timings every game which most of us have never seen. You won't beat a seemingly perfect player when making the mistakes that July made in some of the games. I agree with a lot of what the OP said, while the forcefields help secure a win, they did not win the game for him. | ||
|
CatNzHat
United States1599 Posts
| ||
| ||
