EPTYou'd think the reactive race would have the best scouting instead of the worst.
GSL Finals Analysis (Spoilers Obviously) - Page 7
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
1Eris1
United States5797 Posts
You'd think the reactive race would have the best scouting instead of the worst. | ||
|
confusedcrib
United States1307 Posts
On March 21 2011 08:09 1Eris1 wrote: This thread isn't correct. It's approaching the wrong point. I don't think those games were lost due to forcefield. They were lost due to zerg's shitty scouting. July did everything he could to scout the MC and he got screwed by overlords missing things by inches, or lings running by a second too early, etc. You'd think the reactive race would have the best scouting instead of the worst. That's pretty much what this thread is saying | ||
|
Andtwo
United States126 Posts
A big question in my mind after these games too was how viable speedling expand really is against a FE'ing toss which I wish people would address more closely... However, my main complaint with this thread is that instead of a pure strategy analysis, it has in every section a "why it's not imba" subsection which invites balance discussion and flaming, so I hope it will be locked. | ||
|
1Eris1
United States5797 Posts
On March 21 2011 08:45 confusedcrib wrote: That's pretty much what this thread is saying Ehh maybe, the OP kinda came off to me as this is somehow July's fault. | ||
|
confusedcrib
United States1307 Posts
On March 21 2011 08:59 Andtwo wrote: As everyone else is saying, I think the OP really discounts the subtleties of MC's builds, the earlier gas timings, how much stored energy was in them and how methodical this energy was used to trap the zerg army which did not have the proper burrow upgrades. A big question in my mind after these games too was how viable speedling expand really is against a FE'ing toss which I wish people would address more closely... However, my main complaint with this thread is that instead of a pure strategy analysis, it has in every section a "why it's not imba" subsection which invites balance discussion and flaming, so I hope it will be locked. I did a why it's not imba section because people were complaining that it was imba. If it wasn't such a huge topic at the moment I would not have included it, you are welcome to ignore it. | ||
ZeromuS
Canada13389 Posts
On March 20 2011 16:17 MrBitter wrote: Then he wasn't watching the same games as the rest of us. The forcefield use, while impressive, was very obviously the defining factor in MC's victory. I don't know, I mean the forcefields were extremely helpful I feel they only really directly lead to a win in the first game where a LOT of roaches were prevented from coming down the ramp. I feel that the analysis for the most part is correct in the sense that poor responses or poor decisions of July lead to the loss moreso than the use of forcefield though i do not agree that Forcefield played no role. The FF donut was nothing short of amazing control and FF micro from MC since he forced a lot of roaches into a small stack and used his stalkers to kill them for free on the game on crossfire. Though at the same time teching to spire AND Hydra with little gas to make use of both was a poor decision as well. The lack of hydra range and fighting off creep and not having burrow was also a major mistake in the last game. If he had made use of burrow effectively, then July could have stopped the rushes and forced MC to step back and tech up to an observer and this time would really help July in the long run. I feel that to completely write off Forcefield as the only reason for the win is just as big an issue as writing off forcefields as having no impact but many Zergs have dealt with FF micro effectively and in this case the pushes and timings were approached in as wrong a way as possible and this series just shows that the wrong response is unsalvageable when good use of forcefields is applied. | ||
|
agnu
6 Posts
| ||
|
RobotBodies
47 Posts
On March 20 2011 19:51 Charon1979 wrote: The games showed a few things quite clearly... 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 This is spot on. | ||
|
PD
Norway66 Posts
| ||
|
N3rV[Green]
United States1935 Posts
I honestly think it should be an offense on this site to outright claim "Imbalance" when we still don't even have a years worth of data to work with. Everything is still so infantile and yet people think "oh well X,Y,Z are the ways to play" | ||
|
Brian333
657 Posts
First, the basic strategy was to fake a 3-gate expand and 4-gate. However, you could say this did or did not work since July's denied OL scout revealed the 2nd unit was a Stalker. As we know, when 3-gate expanding, the 2nd unit is typically a Sentry so that the Protoss can start building energy sooner. When you're talking about a player like MC, there is always reason for deviation and July realized this. This would lead to July dropping down the evo chamber and Lair most likely because he thought it was air or DTs since it's typical to hide your tech when doing either. You could say July was faked out but in a different way. Later on, when July was poking in with his zerglings to scout the front, MC hid a good deal of his units and revealed only a handful at his front to hide any hint he might've cut probes or was producing out of 4-gates. Taking that handful of units, MC would also actively hunt and kill July's zerglings to deny him an easy scout of the cancelled Nexus. However, this would only prove partially effective as July still caught sight of 4 Stalkers at the start of MC's push cross map from the Xel'naga tower and due to the timings and the number of sentry / stalkers, it should've became immediately apparent to July that it was a 4-gate and not robo or stargate play. July would immediately drop down 2 spine crawlers and start to produce lings and roaches. In my opinion, the reason he lost was just slightly insufficient crisis management (though it was obviously a hard situation to react to). 2-spine crawlers was simply not enough. He really had no reason not to drop down 4-5 first. You hold that push and you're in a great position even with the investment in static defense. Edit 1: And, after reading game 2's analysis... yea. It's really lacking. You mentioned extremely risky FE build, but really, you have to emphasize that MC basically made no forge and no cannons. That has to be one of the most cost-efficient PvZ FEs in competitive SC2 history. That's absolutely HUGE when looking at FE builds. If you see that, you absolutely have to do something and July did not. Where was his scouting and where was his reaction? First, he went speedling expand when it's really not the best opening on that map (pretty much every GSL ZvP on that map to date has been Hatch first -- I don't know if this has something to do with July's "new style" of ZvP but it contributed greatly to him losing). Then, his 3rd timing was incredibly delayed vs. a FE build. Every competent Zerg knows that if you see such a risky FE, you either all-in and kill him (not very practical on that map especially with delayed Roach speed) or you double expand quickly. July did neither and for someone with his reputation, such indecisiveness or lack of action was just uncharacteristic. Instead, July just sat back and waited to fight MC 2-base vs. 2-base... and it's no surprise he lost that battle. Edit 2: In game 3's analysis, you have the perfect chance to show the difference in cost efficiency in PvZ openers. In game 3, MC had to drop the forge / cannon because July's OL was there to scout on a closer spawn, and later on, MC had to add on more cannons because he couldn't risk the bust (though, it was more likely part of the overall strategy, too). That's so much more money invested into safety. You add that same type of investment into MC's game 2 opener and there is no way the 6-gate hits with as nice a timing with as much in army value. Again, the analysis lacks the type of attention to detail and subtlety that it demands. Unlike game 2, July responds to the FE this time by getting a faster 3rd and unlike what you say, holds even (2-base Protoss = 3-base zerg). July made a pretty costly mistake in not grouping his queens sooner even though he saw the VR leaving MC's base and lost all three Queens as a consequence. If those first 2 queens are together, that initial VR does nothing. If all three were together against the 2-phoenixes + VR with the third phoenix rallied in, perhaps he stalls until Hydras with a transfuse or two. Still, the decisive moment is the Hydra drop that MC admitted to not expecting. I think there are some incredibly important details to point out here. First, some will say he over-made Phoenixes (there is no argument he lost a few carelessly). I disagree because MC had a lot of Sentries which essentially guaranteed that the Phoenixes would be able to fight Hydras in small numbers -- which they excel at. We saw this to a lesser degree when July did drop -- the returning Phoenixes cleaned up the first Hydra drop rather efficiently. Second, the sentries. I thought this was a fascinating and normally logical decision by MC. He spends his warp-gate production cycles producing nothing but Sentries because they guarantee his front will not be busted with cannons up and phoenix there to pick units up. Also, rather than warping in zealots and stalkers and having them stand there relatively useless until combat, he warps in sentries which build energy while waiting, help defend better, and waits until he finally needs the DPS to warp in zealots / stalkers. Unfortunately, that moment came too suddenly because of the drop. Also in the final drop, the Hydras came down right on top of the Sentries rendering FF useless. Third, the transition. Many people say Colossi but unless I'm missing something in MC's production queue, I think the more obvious choice in that situation was HT. After the air harass, you saw him transition to more gateways and not gateway + robo. With the situation he was in, he could've held through the timing window of vulnerability if not for the drop (which he might've held much better had he not lost 2 phoenixes carelessly). It was actually a really interesting build and strategy -- it's just that in true July style, there was a second of vulnerability in MC's play and July crushed through. | ||
|
theBIGdog
United States41 Posts
| ||
|
Xog2
United States97 Posts
Of course protoss would want to defend their ez mode unit. I just obsed a game where a zerg was ahead in worker count throughout the early and midgame. After the protoss repeatedly crushed his roach hydra force the units lost tab showed a ratio of over ten to one in favor of the toss. Imbalance? | ||
|
drinking
Philippines281 Posts
 | ||
|
iNfeRnaL
Germany1908 Posts
On March 21 2011 09:01 1Eris1 wrote: Ehh maybe, the OP kinda came off to me as this is somehow July's fault. No offense, but would you please atleast try to explain me how Zerg does have the worst scouting? Let me elaborate my thought process here: When does a probe die? As soon as there's some Zerglings - especially on creep there's no fucking way to keep the probe running ever. Not even Bisu could. When does a drone die? As soon as Protoss gets a Stalker (yes, it could potentially die to Zealot but if you let it die to a Zealot that is your own fault and nothing else.) After the workers, when can we scout again? Zerg: any time he wants to sacrifice 100 minerals. Protoss: any time he invests 225/175 + production time for an observer or 150/200 for the sentry as well as the hallucination upgrade. Hell yeah, Zerg is SO bad at scouting. | ||
|
1Eris1
United States5797 Posts
On March 21 2011 11:00 iNfeRnaL wrote: No offense, but would you please atleast try to explain me how Zerg does have the worst scouting? Let me elaborate my thought process here: When does a probe die? As soon as there's some Zerglings - especially on creep there's no fucking way to keep the probe running ever. Not even Bisu could. When does a drone die? As soon as Protoss gets a Stalker (yes, it could potentially die to Zealot but if you let it die to a Zealot that is your own fault and nothing else.) After the workers, when can we scout again? Zerg: any time he wants to sacrifice 100 minerals. Protoss: any time he invests 225/175 + production time for an observer or 150/200 for the sentry as well as the hallucination upgrade. Hell yeah, Zerg is SO bad at scouting. Okay, for one, that 100 mineral sacrifice is far from a gurantee. You can look at the games referenced in the OP to show just that. Perhaps I misworded it, Zerg has the worst kind of scouting for what their race needs. Protoss does not need to know what is going on until they have an observer out. Anything before that, can usually be countered with a safe build, or can be picked up by a single probe. But zerg on the other hand, needs to know what is happening at that 6 minute mark. If they don't, there is a huge chance they lose. And there is no easy of doing it. The most reliable option is sacrificing 1 larva, 100 minerals, and 8 supply to try and get a viewing of his base. And this doesn't even work half the time. So yes, if you compare how the races are set up, in that zerg is more reactionary then protoss, then zerg has the worse scouting options. | ||
|
confusedcrib
United States1307 Posts
On March 21 2011 10:38 Brian333 wrote: I haven't read the rest of the topic, but just reading game 1's analysis... there is much left to desire. It was a game with a lot of subtlety and (no offense intended) you barely scraped the surface of it. First, the basic strategy was to fake a 3-gate expand and 4-gate. However, you could say this did or did not work since July's denied OL scout revealed the 2nd unit was a Stalker. As we know, when 3-gate expanding, the 2nd unit is typically a Sentry so that the Protoss can start building energy sooner. When you're talking about a player like MC, there is always reason for deviation and July realized this. This would lead to July dropping down the evo chamber and Lair most likely because he thought it was air or DTs since it's typical to hide your tech when doing either. You could say July was faked out but in a different way. Later on, when July was poking in with his zerglings to scout the front, MC hid a good deal of his units and revealed only a handful at his front to hide any hint he might've cut probes or was producing out of 4-gates. Taking that handful of units, MC would also actively hunt and kill July's zerglings to deny him an easy scout of the cancelled Nexus. However, this would only prove partially effective as July still caught sight of 4 Stalkers at the start of MC's push cross map from the Xel'naga tower and due to the timings and the number of sentry / stalkers, it should've became immediately apparent to July that it was a 4-gate and not robo or stargate play. July would immediately drop down 2 spine crawlers and start to produce lings and roaches. In my opinion, the reason he lost was just slightly insufficient crisis management (though it was obviously a hard situation to react to). 2-spine crawlers was simply not enough. He really had no reason not to drop down 4-5 first. You hold that push and you're in a great position even with the investment in static defense. Edit 1: And, after reading game 2's analysis... yea. It's really lacking. You mentioned extremely risky FE build, but really, you have to emphasize that MC basically made no forge and no cannons. That has to be one of the most cost-efficient PvZ FEs in competitive SC2 history. That's absolutely HUGE when looking at FE builds. If you see that, you absolutely have to do something and July did not. Where was his scouting and where was his reaction? First, he went speedling expand when it's really not the best opening on that map (pretty much every GSL ZvP on that map to date has been Hatch first -- I don't know if this has something to do with July's "new style" of ZvP but it contributed greatly to him losing). Then, his 3rd timing was incredibly delayed vs. a FE build. Every competent Zerg knows that if you see such a risky FE, you either all-in and kill him (not very practical on that map especially with delayed Roach speed) or you double expand quickly. July did neither and for someone with his reputation, such indecisiveness or lack of action was just uncharacteristic. Instead, July just sat back and waited to fight MC 2-base vs. 2-base... and it's no surprise he lost that battle. Edit 2: In game 3's analysis, you have the perfect chance to show the difference in cost efficiency in PvZ openers. In game 3, MC had to drop the forge / cannon because July's OL was there to scout on a closer spawn, and later on, MC had to add on more cannons because he couldn't risk the bust (though, it was more likely part of the overall strategy, too). That's so much more money invested into safety. You add that same type of investment into MC's game 2 opener and there is no way the 6-gate hits with as nice a timing with as much in army value. I feel you man, I really understand everything you are saying and would have really enjoyed to include all of the subtle timings that made that game efficient; however, doing so would have kept me up all night and pausing/playing the VOD constantly. The main purpose of this was to analyze broad strategy, not the specific timings, although I would enjoy doing that in the future. | ||
|
iNfeRnaL
Germany1908 Posts
Protoss does not need to know what is going on until they have an observer out. Anything before that, can usually be countered with a safe build, or can be picked up by a single probe. But zerg on the other hand, needs to know what is happening at that 6 minute mark. If they don't, there is a huge chance they lose. And there is no easy of doing it. The most reliable option is sacrificing 1 larva, 100 minerals, and 8 supply to try and get a viewing of his base. And this doesn't even work half the time. While I do not disagree that Zerg DOES need a lot of scouting and July just barely missed some things (but come on, if you dont check whats behind the mineral lines - the most common place to hide things - that is kinda stupid as well isn't it?) I think it is kind of biased thinking of you there that you do not need any scouting before the observer (actually hallu is the faster option, IMO) - do you know what happens if you get baneling + massling busted if you do not have enough cannons and only 1 sentry out or so cause you went forge FE? Not to even speak of 1 base roach - yes I know that one is hard NOT to realize but July always went for pool first so it was definitely a possibility. What I was trying to emphasize is that scouting in GENERAL is a lot worse than in broodwar, for example. I do not think it is really a "Zerg-only" problem... Look at TvP for example, Terran has countless of good openings and Protoss cannot really tell which one until he got his observer. You see a barracks and maybe if you're lucky you'll be able to tell if he made a techlab or a reactor first. Great, isn't it? I am aware of the fact that in Broodwar I wasn't really able to scout the Terran either (but atleast kept it alive until he had 2-3 rines) before I had an observer, but it wasn't really dead-neccesary either. It was not like you could've died to a wraith rush if your obs was slightly late. I just think its a general mistake that Blizzard did, if you compare to how long early game lasted in broodwar it was not neccesary to have scouting info quite as early as in SC2, simply because the openings did not hard counter each other as blatantly as they sometimes do in SC2. | ||
|
kheldorin
Singapore539 Posts
On March 21 2011 11:05 1Eris1 wrote: Okay, for one, that 100 mineral sacrifice is far from a gurantee. You can look at the games referenced in the OP to show just that. Perhaps I misworded it, Zerg has the worst kind of scouting for what their race needs. Protoss does not need to know what is going on until they have an observer out. Anything before that, can usually be countered with a safe build, or can be picked up by a single probe. But zerg on the other hand, needs to know what is happening at that 6 minute mark. If they don't, there is a huge chance they lose. And there is no easy of doing it. The most reliable option is sacrificing 1 larva, 100 minerals, and 8 supply to try and get a viewing of his base. And this doesn't even work half the time. So yes, if you compare how the races are set up, in that zerg is more reactionary then protoss, then zerg has the worse scouting options. Is that why Protosses have been losing to Losira's mass burrowed roaches and JulyZerg's baneling bust? Cause they don't think that they have to scout before observers? And is that also why Protosses feel forced to build Collossus cause hey, they needed the observers so might as well contrinue the robo route. And a probe will only know that there are zerglings controlling the map, nothing more. Losira, JulyZerg and now Morrow have been successful with non-reactionary strats. So I don't see how Zerg is more reactionary than Protoss. They have better tools for sure to be reactionary as they can tech switch better than any other race but that doesn't mean that they have to play reactionary. | ||
|
Darclite
United States1021 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + If anyone said that Morrow beat Jinro today not because he played a better game, but that zerg is just too easy and powerful, wouldn't you find that laughable? | ||
| ||
