|
In order to try and stifle the whines coming out from every SC2 player, I'm making this thread to actually analyze what happened each game, and how you can actually prevent it happening to you, and hopefully gather real analysis on the games from other players!
Game One
+ Show Spoiler +July opens speedling expand while MC opens with a 4 gate. His 4 gate is ingenious however because he cuts the first wave of units that you would make with a 4 gate to throw down an expansion. This delays his 4 gate for a small amount of time but he has the benefit of two gases and the mind game with his opponent. MC continues to cut probes as if doing a normal 2 gas 4 warp gate and then cancels his expo at the last second, gets one more round of units and rolls July
How it could have been different
+ Show Spoiler +First, had July scouted it, he would have been much better off. July never sacked an overlord in to see what protoss' production was, to his credit, this was the first time this has really been done and Zergs are not used to seeing it. MC won the scouting war because of the originality of the build, in the future it would most likely be scouted.
July did not begin making roaches until the 4 warp gate was half way across the map, and against a 2 gas 4 warp gate, since the push comes 2 minutes later than a 1 gas 4 warp gate, you need to use that extra time to pump roaches. Had July sacked an Overlord at the standard time and had 2 more rounds of production, he would have had 16 extra roaches and been able to easily hold MCs rush and win out in the macro game.
Why it's not imba
+ Show Spoiler +Sentries were not the main factor in winning this game, the sentries were just there to convince the 3 gate expand. Had July seen what MC was doing he could have easily won.
Game Two
+ Show Spoiler +July opens speedling expand while MC opens 1 gate expand. This means that protoss gets his expo down before Zerg, which any player knows is not a good situation. At this point July has to choose between one base all inning and expanding at a disadvantaged position, he chooses the latter. MC is already far ahead as he did an extremely risky opening and July let it fly. Both players then macro up, it is a two basing protoss vs. a two basing Zerg and MC throws down a 5th and 6th gateway and begins to cut probes shortly thereafter. July then RUSHES hydralisks before even beginning roach burrow or speed. July then scouts a 6 gate and begins pumping roaches immediately, making his investment in the hydralisks worthless and his roach upgrades very delayed for no payoff. MC then attacks at the perfect timing before roach burrow is finished and the third base is finishing and easily takes the win.
How it could have been different
+ Show Spoiler +July rushed for hydralisks, delaying his roach burrow and speed too much. He also scouts the 6 gate too late to begin pumping roaches optimally. You'll notice the moment he scouts the 6 gate 11 roaches are produced and hydra range is canceled, this makes it clear that July is simply reacting as best as he can to a rush he didn't know was coming. Had July done the much more standard roach burrow timing to secure a third base, MCs lack of an observer would have meant a free infinite delay of MCs push, long enough for hydras to come in and easily take the game.
Why it's not Imba
+ Show Spoiler +The only thing FF did in game 2 was keep the roaches from kiting the 4 zealots of MC, if all of those sentries were other units, July would have still been rolled because of his mediocre roach timing against a perfect 6 wg timing.
Game 3
+ Show Spoiler +July opens speedling yet again and MC yet again gets a huge early advantage by getting an unpunished fast expand. MC takes back the economic advantage with an extremely fast third before lair, this allows MC's stargate to inflict some good damage before backing off. July then gets very fast hydralisks yet again, but MC, not expecting overlord drop to be upgraded, builds more cannons at the front and keeps his units there while July is able to Hydralisk drop into the main to secure a win before any colossus are out to deal with Hydras effectively.
How it could have been different
+ Show Spoiler +MC did a risky opener for not playing the colossus standard. MC did not give July a reason not to go pure hydra (i.e. colossus, storm, sometimes chargelots) and so July was able to win with it.
Why it's not Imba
+ Show Spoiler +MC let him go pure hydra and deserved to lose against it. Without a timing attack before hydras are out or a high tech unit, hydras will be dominant.
Game 4
+ Show Spoiler +July opens speedling while MC rushes for dark templar (he states in the interview afterwards that he had his practice partners preemptively get detection, indicating that this was not designed to win or be an all in). July is denied his overlord scout and most likely assumes a three warp gate expand. (Notice that this game July gets some preemptive roaches in case another fake expo 4 gate is coming). July sees the darks coming and immediately begins an evo chamber. July loses several roaches and a queen while MC loses nothing. MC begins blink and +1 attack while July takes a third, staying relatively even in economy with MC. July begins his hydra den a little bit later than what seems to be his standard based on the other games, but he does get his spire extremely quickly for a player not going mutaling. July frantically begins roach burrow and pumping roaches when he sees the high gateway unit count from MC. July engages blink +1 stalkers with pure - no burrow - roaches as his spire completes. July simply doesn't have enough to beat the timing push and gg's
How it could have been different
+ Show Spoiler +July could have easily taken this game as well but he seems to have a real problem with scouting his opponent. First he gets hydras and a spire, neither of which even come into play. Second, the counter to a +1 blink stalker build, similar to what Nazgul did against Idra, is either a lot of hydra's or Burrow roaches with equal upgrades, neither of which July had. Had July gotten faster hydras or committed more to roaches with burrow and tunneling claws he could have won, but instead teched in 2 useless directions against a well refined timing push that requires a very particular response.
Why it's not Imba
+ Show Spoiler +The FF that match stopped about 4 roaches from coming down the ramp and gave MC in total about 10 roaches. MC would have EASILY won without the sentries, the loss was purely July's fault for not reacting to his opponent. MCs build should also be given credit, as opening DT is a very cool way to do the blink stalker push without delaying it too much
Game 5
+ Show Spoiler +July speedling expands while MC forge fast expands without any counter pressure, this does put MC off to a starting advantage. July takes a risk though and gets a very fast third before lair. July is super droning, and looks to be off to a great start. MC again goes for the 6 gate play while again July rushes for Hydralisks instead of roach burrow. July begins roach hydra production but has not begun the critical hydra range upgrade yet. MC begins blink and +2 weapons. Hydralisks never get the plus range upgrade and MC slowly wins with upgraded wg units against severely under upgraded roach hydra. In the end it was MC with +3 weapon gateway units against +1 hydras off creep without range.
How it could have been different
+ Show Spoiler +I think that July felt very pressured that round, MC's aggressive army movement kept bating July's army off of creep and messed with July's mindset of upgrading and droning. MC made it look, through his superb army movement, like a 2 base all in was coming when really he had macro'd up and grabbed a third. Had July played a safer game and stayed on top of upgrades he would have easily won, but he really looked to be on tilt and unfocused.
Why it's not Imba
+ Show Spoiler +Again MC could have won without sentries or FF. Not to mention because July was engaging off creep without range, the hydras lack of speed was very easy to abuse. July simply was playing sloppy this last game and had he upgraded better he would have been easily able to win since MC never got colossus out.
To sum up (TL;DR)
July made some very big mistakes, he didn't scout properly and teched too quickly (or not quickly enough) against builds that require very refined, precise timing to beat. His loss had little to nothing to do with FF or any other protoss goodness, but was purely based on how unrefined his play was. July knew the composition he wanted to have, but did not know how to get there.
Also, what should be learned from this series are
For Protoss: some very potent Protoss timings and how to do standard builds in interesting ways
For Zerg: The importance of scouting and tech timings based upon that scouting.
|
Haven't read all of it yet, but what exactly are your credentials? You should probably post that.
|
Oh god lock this.
User was warned for this post
|
Thanks for the analysis, I'm sad July kept going for Hydras. I really wonder if his decision making was best, like in Game 2. Idk how far the Hydra upgrade was, but I don't get why he made un-upgraded Roaches when he already had Hydra tech? And in Game 5 his Hydras were sitting around off creep. So painful to watch.
|
I'm a 2700 masters random, really shouldn't matter too much for game analysis though. And ibreak, you should probably read it before you want it locked, it is discussion of the strategies used, there is no whining at all.
|
This is actually a pretty nice thread. I definitely agree a lot of the games were decided by nice builds from MC and poor reactions by July.
|
On March 20 2011 15:51 ibreakurface wrote:
Oh god lock this.
Please not this thread again..
|
You said game one was the first time for that strategy but it wasn't. I saw kiwikaki do it in the GCPL in root vs eg against idra. He opted to keep his nexus though.
|
On March 20 2011 15:56 Coriolis wrote:
You said game one was the first time for that strategy but it wasn't. I saw kiwikaki do it in the GCPL in root vs eg against idra. He opted to keep his nexus though.
Then it wasn't the same build was it ;P but on a more serious note, it is, if not the first time, very rare in a major global tournament anyone has faked a 3 gate expo into a 2 gas 4 gate
|
So wait... Your analysis is that forcefield was a non-factor in these games?
Seriously?
Are you trolling, or are you really that dense?
User was warned for this post
|
No need for it to be locked. Solid analysis and no whining.
July seemed to be playing scared to me. The loss in game 1 also seemed to have gotten to him and affected his play in the following games.
|
Sounds great. I appreciate the analysis.
|
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?
He's saying its not imba, and while they secured MC's victory they wouldnt've been necessary for him to win because of july's mistakes
|
He's saying its not imba, and while they secured MC's victory they wouldnt've been necessary for him to win because of july's mistakes
Yeah, like OP says if he had Zealots/Stalkers instead of Sentries he still would have won those fights.
|
"If those units were anything but sentries...."
Okay time out now lol. I'm sorry, I commend you for trying to do a higher level analysis of replays; however, you can't say things like that.
That's basically equivalent to saying "Had those 22 speedlings he had at the 5 minute mark been 22 roaches, he would have easily won".
Hell in one of you're lines you wrote that July would have won had he had 2 more production cycles of units against a delayed 4 gate. Well, yeah? Any 4 gate can be stopped with 14 EXTRA roaches. That's just silly to say "oh well, I mean, had there been 2 cycles worth of..." and I'll stop there because I think you get my point. I'd win a hell of a lot more early game engagements if I had 14 bonus larvae too.
I honestly don't think you're giving much credit to arguably one of the top Zergs in the business. July is an incredibly seasoned player, so is MC; however, what you saw wasn't crap scouting by any means from July. It was July thinking very hard about each decision *as all pros do* and MC simply being more prepared for their games.
|
On March 20 2011 16:13 Active.815 wrote:Show nested quote +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? He's saying its not imba, and while they secured MC's victory they wouldnt've been necessary for him to win because of july's mistakes
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.
|
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? While I think that he is understating the impact of FFs in the series, I think he wrote this analysis as a response to the "OMG FF OP WTF BBQ" overreaction that has been going on so much since the finals happened. I do actually agree with most of what he has to say about the ff usage, except it looked as if July might have been able to hold without the FFs in game 1.
I do agree though, that the series was defined by super crisp builds from MC with less-than-stellar responses from July. I thought he got a bit unlucky with his OL missing the dark shrine in game 4, and handled the DTs pretty well, but then just followed it up poorly. It did often seem like he was teching in different directions simultaneously and just ended up with not enough units to combat MC's near-perfectly macroed armies.
|
Yes these situations were bad for Zerg, but i believe that Toss can make Zerg to accept these situations. No chance to not get in these bad situations.
|
July never sacked an overlord in to see what protoss' production was, to his credit, this was the first time this has really been done and Zergs are not used to seeing it.
I've seen it. T_T I don't know if you can say "this was the first time this has really been done"
|
The fact that you think that sentries didnt win these games proves you have no clue. Sentries dominated the finals far and away, the late 4gate push would of been crushed by july without sentries and mc would of been dead. The fact that you think otherwise is just sad and you really dont have an understanding of the game at all.
|
MC > July
colossi? void rays? no. only perfect timings and builds... sry guys but zerg needs an MC not balance
|
I agree completely with a lot of what you are saying. I have two questions, though.
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.
|
lol there is so much hate going on about those finals. I personally think the fact of the matter is that MC played perfectly in every game he won just about, and July did not play up to the same standard.
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.
|
I think it's not about FF, but rather the zerg not knowing in 4/5 games what the P was up to. In game 4, July was able to timing-push the protoss cause he had an overlord on his base half the game.
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.
|
Right now the state of PvZ is like a game of luck with zerg on the losing end. For zerg to compete in a macro game with protoss, zerg needs to cut corners and have way more drones than protoss. Unlike in ZvT, when u can actually compete with equal amt. of drones. Larger army in ZvT means you can actually crush any smaller army moving out and proceed to drone up or even attack straight into their natural. Whereas in ZvP, the defensive capabilities of toss is just too strong. The only choice zerg has is to fend off any attacks protoss throw at them at the last minute. If toss knows you have a larger army than expected, he will just fall back and turtle knowing hes ahead of economy. And it's not really possible to kill any army moving out because they can just forcefield and retreat. Walking on an even more thin line than in ZvT for the decision between droning and army, this is reason why weird protoss timing attacks are so strong.
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
|
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.
|
Australia8532 Posts
I don't think anyone can deny that July made the forcefield look good.. But MC's forcefield control won him that game.. So
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
|
Obviously forcefield was the reason MC won, but it synonymous to cloaked banshees winning against a Protoss with no forge/Robotics
|
I agree with the OP with the mention that if July would have made the things he suggested he would just delay his loss not easy win.
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.
|
July would have required a maphack to detect all the stuff you mention .. so it's mostly not fail in "decision making", but unlucky/incomplete scouting. IMHO its too easy to hide builds/tech in SC2. Sac'ing ovies can be denied and gets too expensive, because you'd have to sac a lot of ovies in order to detect "build cheese" such as canceled exp/hidden tech. Anyway maybe by the time players will improve in anticipating ..
|
I think July pulled a MKP and had an identity crisis before the finals and tried to do something hes not used to. Thats why all the mistakes started piling up such as not superb scouting and everything else
|
To me, it looks like you are starting with the conclusion, and then trying to justify it (In this case, the conclusion is, "There is no imbalance"). This is a poor way to conduct any analysis.
|
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.
|
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!
|
There is almost no way July could have scouted better. Game 1, MC hid all his gateways at the bottom. It's impossible for overlords to get in there. July had lings scouting the expo constantly. He already suspects MC is not going for a expansion. He stopped drone production quite early already. If he stopped drone production earlier, yes he will be able to stop MC's attack, but if MC decides to expo and did not cut probes (july has no way to infer as MC hides part of his army), it will be instant loss for july going into macro game.
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.
|
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
|
you would think there was enough threads defending/attacking whether or not ff is OP.
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,
|
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
|
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.
|
I have to strongly disagree about the sentries not being imba, because without the july coulda just gotten a fine surround, micro'd his heart out, and roflstomped the toss army. Unfortunately MC just went all-in every game, in a classic toss manner, cheese of every variety was quite entertaining, and unfortunately there's no way to actually stop these cheeses without scouting them super early, in which case the toss can just cancel the gateways and tech, then the zerg makes units that are worthless, and can't attack with them due to FF being imba.
|
On March 20 2011 16:15 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:Show nested quote +He's saying its not imba, and while they secured MC's victory they wouldnt've been necessary for him to win because of july's mistakes Yeah, like OP says if he had Zealots/Stalkers instead of Sentries he still would have won those fights.
but the problem with that statement is that it's just not true. forcefields were instrumental in every game so to discuss the series along the lines of 'he could have won without sentries' seems kind of dumb.
|
@^^ FF did win MC the last game, as did a few mistakes that the zerg made, had MC screwed up or made a large mistake, FF would allow him to nullify that mistake, as does chrono-boost in case you forget probes or whatnot. MC really showcased a player who doesn't need to abuse FF to win, but who chooses to anyways, the problem with FF and sentries is the lack of skill and the ammount of leeway you have with them, anyone diamond and above playing toss is about the same difficulty to beat as a top200 toss, they can just FF and stop the army, giving them time, perfect positioning, or whatever they're horrid at. The only way to really beat a toss player is to A:spawn as terran, get ghosts, and hope they don't split their sentries/immortals/templars if they go collosus it's possible to beat them, if they go templar first, then it's gg unless they suck, hardcore suck.
Also, did I mention toss knows exactly what zerg/terran are doing cuz they have obs....
|
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
You're wrong about 2 and 4 here. Hydras don't suck, as some of the finals games demonstrated quite well. They do have risks, however. They are a unit that heavily dominates certain builds, and is heavily dominated by others. Hydras are powerful but situational, and the problem comes when players start treating them as a default go-to unit for all standard builds, which they are not.
The comment about protoss dictating the game is foolish. The point is that MC is using heavy timing attacks. Players doing these types of timing attacks (for any race) only care about whether their opponent will attack before they do. No other information matters, and any player who doesn't strike first is going to be forced to react to the timing attack. It has nothing to do with what races are being played.
|
On March 20 2011 18:52 Dommk wrote:
...The race that is the most aggressive obviously dictates how the game flows, the vast majority of Zergs play a passive/reactive style I think the OP and other posters underestimate the sheer metagame control FF gives Protoss in a PvZ matchup.
Defensively:
Heavy FF use negates any Zerg T1 army at the ramp, alternately locking out or splitting your army into mangeable portions. This makes it difficult to apply early game pressure short of denying the Protoss their natural which 4gate does not need anyways until the push comes. Meanwhile overinvesting in this can slow down the Zerg economy and leave them vulnerable to hard-to-scout tech/air switches.
Offensively:
Between FFing the ramp and the warp-in pylon, 4gate play means the Protoss deny the Zerg the defender advantage while enjoying it themselves, in the Zerg base. The Zerg have to engage outside of their base in order to deny the pylon and keep their ramp secure - there is no earlygame Zerg "counter" once the FF comes down on the ramp. The map has just irrevocably changed for the next 15 seconds.
This means investing earlier in T1 army to retain map control and engaging away from the Zerg base, off the creep, where FF can again divide and conquer their army. Or investing in enough spinecrawlers and queens to repel a 4gate, because you can't FF a spinecrawler.
On March 20 2011 18:52 Dommk wrote:
...it isn't like Zerg is incapable of dictating what the other race must do.
All of the strategies you describe are late T2 for zerg due to gas and time sinks. 4gate play hits before they become active.
The only Zerg ground units that can effectively engage across FF-walls are spine crawlers, queens and hydras. The only midgame workarounds Zerg has are tunneling Roaches for 250/250 with no chrono and Overlord carry for another 300/300.
Simply put, Zerg's melee heavy army needs a better early/midgame game solution to FF play. Queens -> Massive was an interesting suggestion, although it might overbuff them against Phoenix harass.
|
There is no situation you WANT to build hydras, just situations you HAVE TO go hydra.
There is a reason behind why toss always tries to force you into hydra
|
On March 20 2011 20:10 DoorKicker wrote:
Simply put, Zerg's melee heavy army needs a better early/midgame game solution to FF play. Queens -> Massive was an interesting suggestion, although it might overbuff them against Phoenix harass.
With "overbuff" you mean "make them invincible"...
I don't agree with the OP that MC would've won with or without the forcefields. What I agree is that it was mostly MC getting an advantage REGARDLESS of his sentry-heavy compositiong due to strategical choices throughout the game.
Best example would be the game where he went DTs. I mean, cmon people, you just can't cry imba forcefields when DTs made July go into panic mode because he didn't have lair yet.
|
On March 20 2011 20:17 sleepingdog wrote:
With "overbuff" you mean "make them invincible"... So you send a Void Ray instead and enjoy the bonus dmg to Massive targets. Or you fly your Phoenix away. If we're talking invincible, I'd like to get back to the "invincible" FF on my ramp completely negating my troop movements...
|
MrBitter, stop being so bitter. I love what you are doing for the Zerg community but constructive criticism helps more than "are you dense? I play zerg and I can't break forcefields hence forcefields were the reason he won".
There's nothing off in the op's thread and he has reasoned it out very well.
A couple of more units on July's part and aggression (which was denied with ff) could be a valuable insight instead of whatever you posted.
|
nice analysis OP, you can see how it's true since you are making the zerg emos cry again..
|
On March 20 2011 15:51 ibreakurface wrote:
Oh god lock this.
This.
"Why it's not imba"... hmph
Why are you posting this? Awesome recap but I don't think we need any biased opinions on the match-up... besides, there's already and official recap...
|
I don't agree with OP that he would have won those games if he'd had zealots instead of sentries.
The Shakuras game is probably the best example, where July clearly had bigger armies in almost every engagement and would have easily taken out a non-sentry gateway army. The other games were not far behind as examples of game changing forcefields.
Although I don't personally feel that forcefields are imbalanced, this is not a very good analysis.
|
The only way everyone will be convinced that it's really MC who is imba, not the ff's, is if he would switch to Zerg. In other words it just won't happen. So why bother
|
These games simply showed that MC outplayed July so it is nearly impossible to extract anything useful from these games. July got caught with unexpected pushes almost every game,
game 1 tricked into thinking MC expo'd.
game 2 didn't prepare for 6 gate
game 3 MC didn't prepare for hydra drop
game 4 DT push did severe damage (drones lost alot of mining time and lost a queen and 3 or 4 roaches)
game 5 speedling expand vs FFE is pretty stupid as it already leaves you far behind (14 hatch is a must on the map imo). Afterwards he went for both hydra and roach which is bad against a 6 gate. Just choose the one OR the other not both. No creep spread, hardly any upgrades and poor positioning lost him the game.
July lacked severely in scouting but I also think it is slightly too hard for Z to scout effectively. P is not really forced to play aggresive because they have a fine lategame and all the pushes can be easily hidden because of warpgate.
I think key for ZvP at this level is to tech lair in time which July almost never did.
Lair gives access to burrow which is the best way to stop a 6 gate (practically nullifies FF and you can micro nearly dead roaches to stay alive), Lair gives access to hydra to stop air shenanigans and lair gives access to overseers to stop DT. Lair also gives access to speedoverlords of overseers to scout the next move from P.
In a standard game where both players know what the other is doing ZvP is fine imo. It is just that protoss has the option to mix it up easily, which MC abuses very well, whereas zerg can't really surprise protoss (partly because of forcefield).
If anything zerg can use a small buff in scouting, perhaps change ovie speed back to 50/50 or increase the research time for it. I don't believe forcefield is overpowered as it can be easily negated by burrow when it's used in a 6 gate. FF in a 4 gate can be easily stopped by flanking properly.
FFing the ramp might be a little too strong against zerg and might deserve a solution, but making queens massive would provide too many other problems (they would be too weak agains voids, too strong against phoenix). I don't know an elegant solution to the FFing of the ramp actually as any change to it might make FF too weak defensively at the same time.
|
Anyone who plays zerg has lost to Protoss the way July lost to MC. The irritating thing to me is that all MC's wins were some sort of bust or timing attack. There is no way for zerg to scout every conceivable place on the map for what's coming as well as droning and expanding, and teching to lair. Not in the first five-seven minutes. A zerg needs every single larvae and drone and ovie in the early game just to stay on par with Protoss or Terran. Sure, if July had known exactly what MC was up to, he could have held it off. The trick is actually sniffing it out.
The FF's were crucial to MC's wins. You can actually count the number of July's units NOT attacking every single game. It's pretty ridiculous when you add them all up.
While i agree July was build order owned in many of the games econ wise, there's no way he should have lost as badly. The skill difference is not that distant.
Zerg really needs something to do with the scouting early. Either let us make overseers at T1, or OL speed, or tech to lair at the same time as making a queen.
|
I could only see game 1 and i can say, from a zergs point of view, that July scouted perfectly given the constraints he had to deal with:
First of all he DID sac an overlord at the right time, but a stalker was positioned at the very edge so that it would have killed the slow ovie before it could reach the 3 gates hidden at the other side of the base. July retreated the ovie after getting hit to minimize the damage dealt to his economy.
Obviously he couldnt have gotten an ovie in from another angle, as it would have been in range from land units too. In Metalopolis then place from which july sent his scout ovie was the only safe place to do it from.
Then July kept scouting again and again and again with his zerglings at the front to check that the expansion was still there, while many zergs would have only scouted it once and then some time later just to make sure.
Alo he prepared as much as he could once he saw the attack coming: spines, roaches and zerglings. What more could one do in his place? I mean, seriously, as Tastopsis said: the nexus was cancelled at THE LAST SECOND, July did what he could in such a short time frame.
By the way, i wont go into FF are OP or not, but DONT say that the toss would have won the same if he had made stalkers: if he had made stalkers he wouldnt have had the minerals to fake the expansion, which was what put July out of balance.
Thus the problem isnt the forcefield,but the difficulty of scouting that zerg endures.
|
On March 20 2011 21:30 cerebralz wrote:
Anyone who plays zerg has lost to Protoss the way July lost to MC. The irritating thing to me is that all MC's wins were some sort of bust or timing attack. There is no way for zerg to scout every conceivable place on the map for what's coming as well as droning and expanding, and teching to lair. Not in the first five-seven minutes. A zerg needs every single larvae and drone and ovie in the early game just to stay on par with Protoss or Terran. Sure, if July had known exactly what MC was up to, he could have held it off. The trick is actually sniffing it out.
The FF's were crucial to MC's wins. You can actually count the number of July's units NOT attacking every single game. It's pretty ridiculous when you add them all up.
While i agree July was build order owned in many of the games econ wise, there's no way he should have lost as badly. The skill difference is not that distant.
Zerg really needs something to do with the scouting early. Either let us make overseers at T1, or OL speed, or tech to lair at the same time as making a queen.
Overlord speed at tier 1 is an interesting suggestion actually. It won't make zerg's scouting better for free but does give them an option to get intel when it is needed. Basically the same as scanning with terran instead of using MULEs. You can get intel if you need but it will cost you.
At the moment zerg seems to be guessing way too much and they don't have a strategy that can deal with basically anything. T can always make MM vs protoss and be fine against anything but Z has to know exactly what's coming up (DT, air, 4 gate, expo) to react properly.
Not droning enough puts Z behind against a expansion, not getting detection vs DT, not enough units loses vs 4 gate and not enough queens can lose vs air. Getting enough of everything always puts them behind as well though.
Giving burrow a short research time (100 -> 70) would help alot as well. Part of the problem imo is that adapting to some of these P strats simply takes too much time.
Simply nerfing FF so zerg can hold off these rushes even if they didn't prepare fully for it would be a bad move imo, it would make the game more generic as Protoss would stop to switch it up (what would be the point then?) and strategic diversity would be lost. There should always be tactics that punish a poorly scouting player BUT someone who does scout alot should be able to respond in time.
|
The reason why these timing pushes are so strong is due to the fact that the game is too fast (Reactors, Gateway warp-in mechanic) for the current scouting options, as most people alredy pointed out.
I'm almost always playing blind against any competent Terran - Protoss at 3500 Master, you can't just BLINDLY go lair and tech or BLINDLY mass defenses, it's not meant to be that way and it's in fact not like that for the other 2 races. I also play Random at the same 3k+ Master level and i never ever once felt so hopeless and defenseless when losing to some timing push i couldn't counter properly or couldn't scout entirely.
|
I didn't see the finals, but from reading the OP, it seems he's totally unqualified to be analyzing the finals. Not to mention entirely downplaying just how strong forcefields are, and in the one analysis of why july won he says july "deserved the win by making hydras."
Also, just like 50 other people are gonna post, the OP doesn't know what he's talking about when he says getting zealot/stalkers instead of sentries would have the same result. That's obviously not the case.
yeah...
|
I was pretty stunned by the use of stalkers+sentries to beat hydras. That strikes me as gamechanging as MarineKing's use of marines against banelings, showing that a counter is in fact not a counter. Does this mean that burrow roaches are now the only correct response?
|
EDIT:
You know, this is down right stupid trying to argue over the internet, quite honestly it is a waste of time.
I'm not any position to say whether or not Force field is overpowered--that is for Blizzard to decide and I think I can at least take comfort with the fact that nothing idiotic like channeling force fields, one force field per sentry, etc will ever get implemented
But issues with the Force Fielding ramps confuse me to no end. It has been like this for the past Year, it is the very basic use of force field, it isn't like the MC doughnut which makes dealing with armies a lot more efficient, it is the very basic use of force field. It has been used to cut off reinforcements for SOO long.
If this particular style of 4gate is far too strong in combination with it, then that 4gate is probably what needs addressing not force fielding ramps to stop/deny access because that has been like that since the dawn of time and it has never been a major issue until now where people feel compelled to piggy back it on the main issue of Force field dividing armies.
|
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?
I expected a better post from some one so established in SC2 strategy.
I apologize if my OP comes off overly in favor of sentries. Writing "he could have won without them" was probably too much, and is also impossible to prove. The main purpose of this was simply my belief that sentries were far and away not the only thing that won the match for protoss, rather it was his crisply executed builds against lackluster responses.
On March 20 2011 16:35 theBOOCH wrote:
I agree completely with a lot of what you are saying. I have two questions, though.
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.
To answer the first question, July did not do the standard roach burrow timing, there is a reason that that timing push exists: to shut down non-robo protoss play. Had July done that standard timing, MC would have to go defense mode instead of being the controller of the game. iNcontroL and machine talk about this roach timing in their lessons as a time when Zerg reigns supreme. (Or at least one lesson that was streamed  don't want someone telling me they didn't teach them ect. ect.)
Second, I was probably over zealous about FF not being needed at all, but it definitely wasn't the reason he won. The 6 gate timing is very difficult to hold off with perfect, aggressive play, I believe there is a day9 daily on it MC vs Ret. But I'm not entirely understanding the second part of your question, thank you for a well thought out post :D
Also to everyone in this thread that read half of it and posted, says I know nothing, ect. ect. At least appreciate that I posted this in the strategy forum as an analysis of the finals and how July Zerg could have won them. This is real game analysis and I would respect the same in return instead of the typical nonsense found on the forum. There is a reason this is in Strategy and not SC2 general. Even if my analysis is wrong you should say how it is wrong, specifically, and even put 1/4 of the time towards a post that I did into the OP.
|
On March 20 2011 22:29 Nakas wrote:
I was pretty stunned by the use of stalkers+sentries to beat hydras. That strikes me as gamechanging as MarineKing's use of marines against banelings, showing that a counter is in fact not a counter. Does this mean that burrow roaches are now the only correct response?
As I put in the analysis, pure hydra will beat pure gateway, but July never got range and was 2 range attack upgrades behind MC :O gateway armies will still die to hydra's The roach burrow timing just allows you to be aggressive faster than hydras do.
On March 20 2011 22:18 avilo wrote:
I didn't see the finals, but from reading the OP, it seems he's totally unqualified to be analyzing the finals. Not to mention entirely downplaying just how strong forcefields are, and in the one analysis of why july won he says july "deserved the win by making hydras."
Also, just like 50 other people are gonna post, the OP doesn't know what he's talking about when he says getting zealot/stalkers instead of sentries would have the same result. That's obviously not the case.
yeah...
The quoted "July deserved the win by making hydras" is a result that vs. a pure gateway army, hydra's will win you the game. July should have won, as MC never gave him a reason not to go pure hydra (i.e. colossus, storm, ect.) but July was very flustered and engaging poorly off creep and way behind with upgrades as I said above. And I addressed in the post above that I was probably over-zealous in stating that he would have won with pure zealot stalker because that is impossible to prove, rather what I should have said was "it was not the sentries that won him the game." I'll edit the OP. And now I know why this line is getting quoted so much, as it is under game one.
Thank you to everyone putting in real analysis rather than saying I'm stupid. Well, and to the people saying I'm stupid but letting me know why
Also I was actually going to add into this post that people should be complaining about Zerg scouting mechanics rather than FF, as I think that is a legitimate thing for people to complain about.
|
The first game wasn't a unique build by any means, I mean even Choya did 3gate/Stargate with a fake expo against Nestea but I think it's incorrect to say that the sentries didn't make the difference - the ramp was continuously FF'd, you could see that there would be enough roaches/lings produced from the main that could have cleaned up the remainder of MC's forces before his next warp-in, but they were constantly stuck inside the base and out of range.
|
On March 20 2011 23:26 PartyBiscuit wrote:
The first game wasn't a unique build by any means, I mean even Choya did 3gate/Stargate with a fake expo against Nestea but I think it's incorrect to say that the sentries didn't make the difference - the ramp was continuously FF'd, you could see that there would be enough roaches/lings produced from the main that could have cleaned up the remainder of MC's forces before his next warp-in, but they were constantly stuck inside the base and out of range.
Ya, I'm really not sure if the other units had not been sentries he still would have won as I said earlier. Either way I think it is safe to say that July began pumping units too late, and that his play was not optimal against a 2 gas - 4 warp gate
|
On March 20 2011 23:31 confusedcrib wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 23:26 PartyBiscuit wrote:
The first game wasn't a unique build by any means, I mean even Choya did 3gate/Stargate with a fake expo against Nestea but I think it's incorrect to say that the sentries didn't make the difference - the ramp was continuously FF'd, you could see that there would be enough roaches/lings produced from the main that could have cleaned up the remainder of MC's forces before his next warp-in, but they were constantly stuck inside the base and out of range. Ya, I'm really not sure if the other units had not been sentries he still would have won as I said earlier. Either way I think it is safe to say that July began pumping units too late, and that his play was not optimal against a 2 gas - 4 warp gate
how was he to know that it was a 4 gate and not 3 gate expand though? positioning of the gates mean sacking an overloard wouldn't have cut it. he was running in lings every 10 seconds to check unit composition and the minute he noticed too many units, he cut drones and pumped non stop units. this is an actual question. how could he have known earlier?
|
On March 20 2011 23:35 rmAmnesiac wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 23:31 confusedcrib wrote:On March 20 2011 23:26 PartyBiscuit wrote:
The first game wasn't a unique build by any means, I mean even Choya did 3gate/Stargate with a fake expo against Nestea but I think it's incorrect to say that the sentries didn't make the difference - the ramp was continuously FF'd, you could see that there would be enough roaches/lings produced from the main that could have cleaned up the remainder of MC's forces before his next warp-in, but they were constantly stuck inside the base and out of range. Ya, I'm really not sure if the other units had not been sentries he still would have won as I said earlier. Either way I think it is safe to say that July began pumping units too late, and that his play was not optimal against a 2 gas - 4 warp gate how was he to know that it was a 4 gate and not 3 gate expand though? positioning of the gates mean sacking an overloard wouldn't have cut it. he was running in lings every 10 seconds to check unit composition and the minute he noticed too many units, he cut drones and pumped non stop units. this is an actual question. how could he have known earlier?
This is one of the rare times that this build has every been done so most Zergs wouldn't even be thinking it. I honestly don't know how he could have seen it without sacking two overlords, I think that this lack of scouting for Z is a legitimate problem with the game.
|
____It's important to add to this discussion, that any form of 6 gate without sentries or massive numbers of stalkers is complete garbage and can be dealt with almost any zerg unit composition( as seen in builds like the one aquanda posted on this forums), what makes it so strong is the ability to cut reinforcements and the ability to negate roach and ling use, electively cutting down the standing zerg army from tier one out of the of the fight.
____Ppl seem to rly like the effective use of forcefields but neglect the fact, that their free, sentries still do dmg even tho they do less dmg then the other units so it's not like their loosing army size to get forcefields.
____With these two points alone it's easy to see that the answer to this kind of mass sentry is neither simple nor does i have equal costs for both sides, the other point i would like to make is that there is only one known counter to 6 gate atm which is roach with burrow (doesn't work with other units because u need the regen) that in itself is a huge problem, zerg is forced to do a huge commitment without rly knowing if he's going to be attacked or not, the protoss can just throw 5/6 gates in their base and not use it while the zerg will have to immediately spend all of is resources building an army (roach + speed + burrow).
____And that creates a problem in the match-up, where u either go blind burrow with roach and get behind hoping to get 6 gated or u don't, and hope that ur opponent doesn't 6 gate, and yes scouting doesn't rly work here, the protoss can easily make the 6 gates and never use them with just the slight cost of 300 minerals and a delayed robot tech forcing the scouting zerg to pay higher costs creating a defense for nothing.
____People keep downplaying the importance of the sentry in the mc-july games, and to do that they should understand why they were built, mc didn't make 10-12 sentries 3 of the games just because he could, he made them because they increased is army effectiveness ten fold, while i do believe he would've won with other units compositions, the fact is that those fights we're completely lopsided even tho in some of the cases july had the units to fight back.
u shouldn't answer to this post if ur not gonna read everything
|
I'd only like to point out one thing that I believe is wrong:
+ Show Spoiler +The only thing FF did in game 2 was keep the roaches from kiting the 4 zealots of MC, if all of those sentries were other units, July would have still been rolled because of his mediocre roach timing against a perfect 6 wg timing. The FF's literally stuffed 15 roaches, and 20 lings into a space wide enough to fit 2 zealots at a time, and so the lings and roaches would one-shot a zealot, but take 4 roach shots (because of overkill) to take out the 4 zealots blocking the way. In that time, the 11 sentries, and few stalkers were able to pretty much kill everything. The roaches were unable to hit the sentries and stalkers because of the 4 range vs 5/6 range. July was only rolled because his army was a nice and easy ball to ff. He had sufficient forces to deal with the push excepting the ff. Perhaps he wasn't used to being ff'd so effectively, but he shouldn't have had the army in such a tight ball (the lings must have been in the same control group because they moved the same way as the roaches). As far as the rest of what you wrote - there are some stuff that are pretty correct, and some stuff up for interpretation. We don't know what July was thinking (especially in that last game), but he didn't play that badly. His micro was very good, and his reaction times were good (in game 1, he started the roaches the moment MC moved out, not halfway across the map). My guess is that he never faced a toss of MC's ability, and so his timings were all just a little off.
|
Thank you for pointing out the actual builds and strategies the players did and some of their thoughts and reactions to them rather than going "oh he got unit x and used ability y when his opponent didn't get unit z so he won". Everybody seems to think that there was absolutely nothing July could have done to win these games due to forcefields, which is absolutely untrue.
Good decision to wait a day or two before posting this thread as well, allows some more thought to be put into it and causes less anger to be received. Overall very good OP.
|
Have u even played zerg before? Ur basically assuming julg had maphacks and knew exactly everything mc was doing. In reality its so fking hard to scout toss. Mc was good in placing his buildings and stopping overlord scouting, rlly hard to know exactly what hes doing. Yea if july poured all his resources into defending the rush he would have survived but if u played zvp ud realize theres a bunch of shit toss can do to u and u have to at least set urself up to react to it. So wen u say things like he shouldnt have built a spire it may be right cuz ur an observer but for the player theres no guarentee hes not hiding a robo or something in which case u lost. To me it comes down to zerg being the most reactive race yet having worse scouting option.
Also i question how much u actually know when u say things like forcefields didnt help win the game. Yea he only boxed 10 roaches and stopped 5 from coming down the ramp no biggie. No, the FFs were everything on those pushes. Like seriously i cant understand how any1 who knows anything about the game can come to that conclusion. Mc said himself protoss live and die by forcefields. Bad analysis imo
|
On March 20 2011 23:48 confusedcrib wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 23:35 rmAmnesiac wrote:On March 20 2011 23:31 confusedcrib wrote:On March 20 2011 23:26 PartyBiscuit wrote:
The first game wasn't a unique build by any means, I mean even Choya did 3gate/Stargate with a fake expo against Nestea but I think it's incorrect to say that the sentries didn't make the difference - the ramp was continuously FF'd, you could see that there would be enough roaches/lings produced from the main that could have cleaned up the remainder of MC's forces before his next warp-in, but they were constantly stuck inside the base and out of range. Ya, I'm really not sure if the other units had not been sentries he still would have won as I said earlier. Either way I think it is safe to say that July began pumping units too late, and that his play was not optimal against a 2 gas - 4 warp gate how was he to know that it was a 4 gate and not 3 gate expand though? positioning of the gates mean sacking an overloard wouldn't have cut it. he was running in lings every 10 seconds to check unit composition and the minute he noticed too many units, he cut drones and pumped non stop units. this is an actual question. how could he have known earlier? This is one of the rare times that this build has every been done so most Zergs wouldn't even be thinking it. I honestly don't know how he could have seen it without sacking two overlords, I think that this lack of scouting for Z is a legitimate problem with the game.
Its not even unique ive had this done to me so mang times on ladder >_>
|
On March 21 2011 00:22 SubtleArt wrote:
Have u even played zerg before? Ur basically assuming julg had maphacks and knew exactly everything mc was doing. In reality its so fking hard to scout toss. Mc was good in placing his buildings and stopping overlord scouting, rlly hard to know exactly what hes doing. Yea if july poured all his resources into defending the rush he would have survived but if u played zvp ud realize theres a bunch of shit toss can do to u and u have to at least set urself up to react to it. So wen u say things like he shouldnt have built a spire it may be right cuz ur an observer but for the player theres no guarentee hes not hiding a robo or something in which case u lost. To me it comes down to zerg being the most reactive race yet having worse scouting option.
Also i question how much u actually know when u say things like forcefields didnt help win the game. Yea he only boxed 10 roaches and stopped 5 from coming down the ramp no biggie. No, the FFs were everything on those pushes. Like seriously i cant understand how any1 who knows anything about the game can come to that conclusion. Mc said himself protoss live and die by forcefields. Bad analysis imo
Had July seen what was going on he could have stopped it, I actually think that Zerg scouting is unbelievably difficult and still has to be figured out/ perhaps needs some kind of buff to help it. FF did help win the game, but he did not win because they are too good.
|
Let me see you play protoss dont you Original poster
cause no one in there right state thinks thats balanced even MC him self said protoss is over powered in the post game interview what does that tell you?
|
On March 21 2011 00:43 Mr.marine wrote:
Let me see you play protoss dont you Original poster
cause no one in there right state thinks thats balanced even MC him self said protoss is over powered in the post game interview what does that tell you?
http://sc2ranks.com/us/678710/ConfusedCrib I play random
|
On March 21 2011 00:48 confusedcrib wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2011 00:43 Mr.marine wrote:
Let me see you play protoss dont you Original poster
cause no one in there right state thinks thats balanced even MC him self said protoss is over powered in the post game interview what does that tell you? http://sc2ranks.com/us/678710/ConfusedCrib I play random
The fact that hes cocky should add more weight to it... I can see someone modest saying that their race helped but when some1 that confident in his skill says his race helped him it says something
|
@confusedcrib
One of the points that you did not mention in your original post is that the zerg kept on engaging protoss in non-favourable position(ramps, chokes). For Zergs, where you engage the opponent makes a huge difference. For example, in the 5th game on Shakuras, July was baited into attacking MC at the choke. MC did not use FFs in the wide open area where he first met the hydras.
I have one additional point to add. FFs are not free. They cost quite a bit of energy, which is why MC always gets them early. During this time, there is a small window of opportunity in which they mostly have zealots and sentries. They can't get too many stalkers because it is too gas intensive. This is the perfect time for zergs to go for some speedling/baneling aggression to bait out FFs and to trade cheap mineral units for expensive gas ones. Letting a protoss store energy for FFs is like letting a Zerg whore drones in the first 8 minutes without any pressure.
|
Expansion-cancelling should've been something July knew of. It has been around since a while (I saw it Socke doing it 2 weeks ago), but otherwise good analysis.
|
On March 21 2011 00:43 Mr.marine wrote:
Let me see you play protoss dont you Original poster
cause no one in there right state thinks thats balanced even MC him self said protoss is over powered in the post game interview what does that tell you?
He didn't say it was overpowered. He just said that he accepst any upcoming protoss nerfs if that would remove any doubts that he won because of his skill and not his race. The funny thing is that none of the upcoming nerfs would have affected that final anyway.
I really don't understand why it is so complicated. If the Zerg doesn't prepare for Colossus, he dies. Everyone can accept that. So why don't people accept the fact that if he doesn't go for burrowed roach against mass sentries, he's gonna be in huge trouble.
Seriously Kudos to MC for not having to rely on robo builds. It's sad that people do not appreciate the people who are thought of new builds as much as the people who are executing them. It's rare to have a player than can do both. If you think that,sentry forcefield, blink stalkers + DT is not harder to execute than deathball collossus or mass roach/hydra, you have not played much. Give credit where it is due.
|
FINALLY someone with some sense analyzing these games. the nonstop flood of 'forcefield IMBA' has been starting to make me sick to my stomach. July played like crap, plain and simple. yes the forcefields helped MC a lot. but they did not win the series, they just helped him out. July being folded every which way by MC's mindgames is why MC won.
|
On March 21 2011 01:05 setmeal wrote:
@confusedcrib
One of the points that you did not mention in your original post is that the zerg kept on engaging protoss in non-favourable position(ramps, chokes). For Zergs, where you engage the opponent makes a huge difference. For example, in the 5th game on Shakuras, July was baited into attacking MC at the choke. MC did not use FFs in the wide open area where he first met the hydras.
I have one additional point to add. FFs are not free. They cost quite a bit of energy, which is why MC always gets them early. During this time, there is a small window of opportunity in which they mostly have zealots and sentries. They can't get too many stalkers because it is too gas intensive. This is the perfect time for zergs to go for some speedling/baneling aggression to bait out FFs and to trade cheap mineral units for expensive gas ones. Letting a protoss store energy for FFs is like letting a Zerg whore drones in the first 8 minutes without any pressure.
So with your reasoning zerg should all in every single zvp game. I rlly dont know what game youre playing but to me a game where u have to all in 5 minutes in or have no chance is pretty stupid. This is of course assuming ur right but i have no idea where ur pulling this timing from. Ling bling all in is easily holdable with forcefields anx good building placement
Also ur sentry / drone for 8 minute comparison is lost when u realize a zerg droning for 8 minutes will outright die to light aggresion let alone a committed attack whereas its basically impossible for z to pressure early without all ining and even that sucks. Seriously what wat r u gonna have, slow roaches ?
|
On March 21 2011 01:35 SubtleArt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2011 01:05 setmeal wrote:
@confusedcrib
One of the points that you did not mention in your original post is that the zerg kept on engaging protoss in non-favourable position(ramps, chokes). For Zergs, where you engage the opponent makes a huge difference. For example, in the 5th game on Shakuras, July was baited into attacking MC at the choke. MC did not use FFs in the wide open area where he first met the hydras.
I have one additional point to add. FFs are not free. They cost quite a bit of energy, which is why MC always gets them early. During this time, there is a small window of opportunity in which they mostly have zealots and sentries. They can't get too many stalkers because it is too gas intensive. This is the perfect time for zergs to go for some speedling/baneling aggression to bait out FFs and to trade cheap mineral units for expensive gas ones. Letting a protoss store energy for FFs is like letting a Zerg whore drones in the first 8 minutes without any pressure.
So with your reasoning zerg should all in every single zvp game. I rlly dont know what game youre playing but to me a game where u have to all in 5 minutes in or have no chance is pretty stupid. This is of course assuming ur right but i have no idea where ur pulling this timing from. Ling bling all in is easily holdable with forcefields anx good building placement Also ur sentry / drone for 8 minute comparison is lost when u realize a zerg droning for 8 minutes will outright die to light aggresion let alone a committed attack whereas its basically impossible for z to pressure early without all ining and even that sucks. Seriously what wat r u gonna have, slow roaches ?
Applying pressure does not constitute all-inning. Make him use forcefields to defend or force him to make less sentries and more stalkers/zealots cause sentries are crappy defensive units once they have used up their forcefields.
This is still irrelevant though. I don't think zerg even needs to pressure the Protoss; just get the damn burrowed upgrade.
|
I really don't understand why it is so complicated. If the Zerg doesn't prepare for Colossus, he dies. Everyone can accept that. So why don't people accept the fact that if he doesn't go for burrowed roach against mass sentries, he's gonna be in huge trouble.
I think mainly because these situations keep growing.
If zerg has not prepared X he dies
If zerg doesnt spot Y he dies
If zerg engages in place Z he dies
Is there any situation where you go like "Oh, he has 3 ultralisks and i didnt build any VRs... i am so dead now" or "Oh he faked a FE and is doing some 1 base agression now... i am going to die"
Thats less an issue of "balance" but "gameplay" and "feeling"
Getting stomped time after time, seeing dozend different builds and having to stick to a rather passive gameplay with just a few valid builds can get tiresome
|
You guys are overthinking it.
MC did builds that were super safe defensively, and very agressive, against july who like to be the one dishing out the agression.
Thats it really.
The fact that MC was being tricky, and that july was unlucky with his scouting just compounded the issue, making MC's all-ins even harder to stop for a zerg that prefers being on the offensive instead of the defensive.
I have one additional point to add. FFs are not free. They cost quite a bit of energy, which is why MC always gets them early. During this time, there is a small window of opportunity in which they mostly have zealots and sentries. They can't get too many stalkers because it is too gas intensive. This is the perfect time for zergs to go for some speedling/baneling aggression to bait out FFs and to trade cheap mineral units for expensive gas ones. Letting a protoss store energy for FFs is like letting a Zerg whore drones in the first 8 minutes without any pressure.
Attacking with speedlings into 7-10 defensively positioned sentries with progamer forcefields is suicide.
Pressuring a zerg whoring drones is easy. He makes too many drones, you attack, you win.
Pressuring a toss making too many sentries is impossible for zerg. Broodlords, ultras, ranged hydras, and sometimes burrowed roaches can help pressure against sentries, but by the time you get those, the toss is going to have more than just sentries with a couple of zealots.
If you personally always lose a bunch of sentries to speedling agression, well thats sad. But people with good forcefields definitly dont fear being attacked by a bunch of speedlings when they have 7-10 sentries in a defensive position
|
On March 21 2011 01:46 Charon1979 wrote:Show nested quote +
I really don't understand why it is so complicated. If the Zerg doesn't prepare for Colossus, he dies. Everyone can accept that. So why don't people accept the fact that if he doesn't go for burrowed roach against mass sentries, he's gonna be in huge trouble.
I think mainly because these situations keep growing. If zerg has not prepared X he dies If zerg doesnt spot Y he dies If zerg engages in place Z he dies Is there any situation where you go like "Oh, he has 3 ultralisks and i didnt build any VRs... i am so dead now" or "Oh he faked a FE and is doing some 1 base agression now... i am going to die"
Didn't spot overlord drop research. Dies.
In Huk vs Losira, didn't spot mass roaches with burrow. Dies.
Do you know how fucking hard it is to play without observers? You have to dictate the match, and to do that you have to deny scouting. And if you don't do both well enough, you lose.
|
All of the flaming of the original post isn't needed. He tried to break down the games in a well thought out manner.
Personally while watching the games, I felt like July reacted poorly as well. Four gates are hard to stop, certainly. July knew something was up though. He kept sacking lings in that group of eight lings to try and get views of the nexus.
The second game is about the most standard 6 gate push in the world. MC does it better, yes. But it is nearly the same build HuK used in his code A matches. Losira responded much better than July and HuK played it a bit worse. Honestly, with early burrow and speed if you engage mid-map or sooner what is protoss going to do with forcefields?
In my opinion using the GSL finals as any sort of balance meter is really a bad plan. July didn't execute well. I am not saying anything about his skill. Against MVP, a couple allins crushed a very strong macro terran. The games vs Nada displayed great understanding of the ZvT match.
But, in the end July reacted very poorly to very common builds.
|
On March 21 2011 01:46 Charon1979 wrote:Show nested quote +
I really don't understand why it is so complicated. If the Zerg doesn't prepare for Colossus, he dies. Everyone can accept that. So why don't people accept the fact that if he doesn't go for burrowed roach against mass sentries, he's gonna be in huge trouble.
I think mainly because these situations keep growing. If zerg has not prepared X he dies If zerg doesnt spot Y he dies If zerg engages in place Z he dies Is there any situation where you go like "Oh, he has 3 ultralisks and i didnt build any VRs... i am so dead now" or "Oh he faked a FE and is doing some 1 base agression now... i am going to die"
Meh, thats what we get for being the defensive, reactive race, without any defending advantage, or proper scouting.
Its only going to get worse until things change, and zergs find their own powerful all-ins that will restrict the toss and terran players, and force them to scout.
|
If you didn't spot something it's most like your own fault. Unless July knew everything that was coming and made perfect decision making and STILL lost, people shouldn't hop on the imba-train.
Fact of the matter is, he didn't scout the pushes that were coming and underprepared for most of them. That's more an attribute to the players and less to the imbalance-monster lurking in everyone's mind.
|
he sacced an overlord, and didnt see what he needed to see.
Mostly everyone would agree, thats unlucky, but not "his own fault"
Thats the problem when your scouting relies on luck and what the opponent is willing to show you, its extremely hard to hold of well designed pushes that require a specifc counter be started for them minutes ahead of when they will actually arrive.
|
On March 21 2011 01:35 SubtleArt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2011 01:05 setmeal wrote:
@confusedcrib
One of the points that you did not mention in your original post is that the zerg kept on engaging protoss in non-favourable position(ramps, chokes). For Zergs, where you engage the opponent makes a huge difference. For example, in the 5th game on Shakuras, July was baited into attacking MC at the choke. MC did not use FFs in the wide open area where he first met the hydras.
I have one additional point to add. FFs are not free. They cost quite a bit of energy, which is why MC always gets them early. During this time, there is a small window of opportunity in which they mostly have zealots and sentries. They can't get too many stalkers because it is too gas intensive. This is the perfect time for zergs to go for some speedling/baneling aggression to bait out FFs and to trade cheap mineral units for expensive gas ones. Letting a protoss store energy for FFs is like letting a Zerg whore drones in the first 8 minutes without any pressure.
So with your reasoning zerg should all in every single zvp game. I rlly dont know what game youre playing but to me a game where u have to all in 5 minutes in or have no chance is pretty stupid. This is of course assuming ur right but i have no idea where ur pulling this timing from. Ling bling all in is easily holdable with forcefields anx good building placement Also ur sentry / drone for 8 minute comparison is lost when u realize a zerg droning for 8 minutes will outright die to light aggresion let alone a committed attack whereas its basically impossible for z to pressure early without all ining and even that sucks. Seriously what wat r u gonna have, slow roaches ?
You can put on pressure without an all-in. Forcefields really form an indispensable core of the protoss army. Zealots and stalkers are simply not very cost-effective units, compared to say, the roach. It is necessary to squeeze them dry of FFs so that they can't move out and so will remain at their natural for a bit longer. I am sure you have done speedling surrounds on sentries before. The toss will FF all around to save his precious sentries. Even if you don't kill the sentries in this engagement, you have a significant advantage because FFs are not there to save his ass in the next engagement.
Erm...I'll try to give an example. The most recent game that I can remember with MC in it is LiquidRet versus OGSMC. Note how ret pokes in several times and forces MC to commit with forcefields without losing too much.
MC versus Rethttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2iDIX4aGls
On a sitenote, I saw incontrol playing with a highly aggressive speedling/baneling Zerg style on his stream and he has talked about it in a recent SoTG. Unfortunately, I don't have any videos of it.
|
What if we all took the mature route and looked at the force field as an obstacle to be overcome and conquered with practice, dedication, and skill rather than something that is totally broken and needs to be nerfed.
Perhaps standard play isn't good enough anymore, perhaps players need to begin to think outside the box. Force the meta game to change, it did so many times in BW i dont understand why people have no hope for SC2. This game is still sooo new, but why cant we all just approach these problems rationally instead of asking whether or not something is imba and then flaming each other?
|
On March 21 2011 02:14 drgonzhere wrote:
What if we all took the mature route and looked at the force field as an obstacle to be overcome and conquered with practice, dedication, and skill rather than something that is totally broken and needs to be nerfed.
Perhaps standard play isn't good enough anymore, perhaps players need to begin to think outside the box. Force the meta game to change, it did so many times in BW i dont understand why people have no hope for SC2. This game is still sooo new, but why cant we all just approach these problems rationally instead of asking whether or not something is imba and then flaming each other?
This. Everyone in this thread should read this post.
Fruitdealer brought hope to Zerg in GSL season 1 by showing how to defend hatch first builds and caused Terrans to QQ about Zerg(is that even possible LOL!?) being OP.
MarineKingPrime evolved Terran play by popularizing 2 rax openings and early pressure to punish greedy Zergs.
OGSMC is more or less credited with the FF bunker rush to punish terrans that try to bunker up and tech quickly.
The six gate timing push was in fact evolved to hit Zerg at a vulnerable timing before they can get a mutaball out.
The Zerg answer to that was the 2 hatch burrowed Roach build, which punished Toss for not going Robo.
The game evolves. I am sure our new Zerg hero will come soon with an answer to these silly FFs and we will all joke and laugh about it later on.
|
On March 21 2011 01:54 Uhnno wrote:
If you didn't spot something it's most like your own fault. Unless July knew everything that was coming and made perfect decision making and STILL lost, people shouldn't hop on the imba-train.
Fact of the matter is, he didn't scout the pushes that were coming and underprepared for most of them. That's more an attribute to the players and less to the imbalance-monster lurking in everyone's mind.
please actually watch some of the games before making ill-informed posts. game one i am still waiting to see a suggesstion as to how july could have known that was a 4 gate all-in rather than a 3 gate expand. nexus was faked and cancelled at the very last minute, pylon was made at bottom of ramp and only a 3 gate expands worth of units at the bottom of ramp. sacking an overloard wouldn't have cut it because of positioning of gates and his lings were running in every 10 seconds to check. the minute he noticed too many units he cancelled all donre production made spines and pumped not stop roach ling. a single forcefield on the ramp is comparable to only being able to warp in 2 gates worth of reinforcements for protoss instead of 4 gates worth so it was always going to be tough. drones were used and micro was near spot on. so i ask you what could he have done differently? there must have been something.
|
On March 21 2011 01:46 Charon1979 wrote:Show nested quote +
I really don't understand why it is so complicated. If the Zerg doesn't prepare for Colossus, he dies. Everyone can accept that. So why don't people accept the fact that if he doesn't go for burrowed roach against mass sentries, he's gonna be in huge trouble.
I think mainly because these situations keep growing. If zerg has not prepared X he dies If zerg doesnt spot Y he dies If zerg engages in place Z he dies Is there any situation where you go like "Oh, he has 3 ultralisks and i didnt build any VRs... i am so dead now" or "Oh he faked a FE and is doing some 1 base agression now... i am going to die" Thats less an issue of "balance" but "gameplay" and "feeling" Getting stomped time after time, seeing dozend different builds and having to stick to a rather passive gameplay with just a few valid builds can get tiresome
I think this is closer to the heart of Zerg frustrations then FF discussion. There is just no way Zerg can dictate the game without truly going all-in. The idea that 'Zerg' is the reactionary race is BS. Toss can create units in 5 sec. That's reactionary.
For any toss who doesn't think playing against toss is incredibly frustrating answer me this. What is your least favorite match-up? I bet it's PvP, for reasons similar to those listed above.
PvP has the SAME problems as ZvP in terms of general game-play. Terran can get around it because MMM kills everything in the early - mid game.
|
On March 21 2011 02:37 rmAmnesiac wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2011 01:54 Uhnno wrote:
If you didn't spot something it's most like your own fault. Unless July knew everything that was coming and made perfect decision making and STILL lost, people shouldn't hop on the imba-train.
Fact of the matter is, he didn't scout the pushes that were coming and underprepared for most of them. That's more an attribute to the players and less to the imbalance-monster lurking in everyone's mind. please actually watch some of the games before making ill-informed posts. game one i am still waiting to see a suggesstion as to how july could have known that was a 4 gate all-in rather than a 3 gate expand. nexus was faked and cancelled at the very last minute, pylon was made at bottom of ramp and only a 3 gate expands worth of units at the bottom of ramp. sacking an overloard wouldn't have cut it because of positioning of gates and his lings were running in every 10 seconds to check. the minute he noticed too many units he cancelled all donre production made spines and pumped not stop roach ling. a single forcefield on the ramp is comparable to only being able to warp in 2 gates worth of reinforcements for protoss instead of 4 gates worth so it was always going to be tough. drones were used and micro was near spot on. so i ask you what could he have done differently? there must have been something.
I don't think there was much July could have done. MC even positioned his range units such that they could intercept any overlords. But then again, this is a game of imperfect information. Even Terran, with arguably the earliest and best in game detection cannot catch a 4-gate when all the gates are split up all over. Some intuition is required, I guess. I would give anything to know how Nestea does it perfectly all the time.
|
"If those units were anything but sentries...."
Okay time out now lol. I'm sorry, I commend you for trying to do a higher level analysis of replays; however, you can't say things like that.
That's basically equivalent to saying "Had those 22 speedlings he had at the 5 minute mark been 22 roaches, he would have easily won".
Hell in one of you're lines you wrote that July would have won had he had 2 more production cycles of units against a delayed 4 gate. Well, yeah? Any 4 gate can be stopped with 14 EXTRA roaches. That's just silly to say "oh well, I mean, had there been 2 cycles worth of..." and I'll stop there because I think you get my point. I'd win a hell of a lot more early game engagements if I had 14 bonus larvae too. You're just repeating and reinforcing what he says by saying any 4 gate can be stopped with 14 more Roaches. That's exactly his point, and that's why MC wasn't doing anything "imb4".
I honestly don't think you're giving much credit to arguably one of the top Zergs in the business. July is an incredibly seasoned player, so is MC; however, what you saw wasn't crap scouting by any means from July. It was July thinking very hard about each decision *as all pros do* and MC simply being more prepared for their games.
He's not trying to say that July should have won or anything like that. The responses/analysis are targetted towards explaining why MC's strategy isn't imbalanced. And no saying 22 speedlings is 22 roaches does not work because 22 roaches are much more expensive. So yes, he can say things like that, but you were misinterpreting him.
The fact that you think that sentries didnt win these games proves you have no clue. Sentries dominated the finals far and away, the late 4gate push would of been crushed by july without sentries and mc would of been dead. The fact that you think otherwise is just sad and you really dont have an understanding of the game at all.
Instead of attacking him and derailing him, why don't you actually respond to what he said and make a proper argument? Posts like yours get discussions no where. And certainly, if all those Sentries had been Stalkers (arguable cheaper than Sentries) or even Zealots, MC would have still won. He had WAY too many units for July to handle.
|
Even if you don't kill the sentries in this engagement, you have a significant advantage because FFs are not there to save his ass in the next engagement.
Erm...I'll try to give an example. The most recent game that I can remember with MC in it is LiquidRet versus OGSMC. Note how ret pokes in several times and forces MC to commit with forcefields without losing too much.
Well note how that doesnt work.
He has forcefields to kill lings. He has forcefields to kill the roaches. And then he still has 9 forcefields for the roach-ling attack.
When the toss has a high amount of forcefields, like 7-10, then there is really no depleting of forcefields that can be done, at this point, they are pretty much unlimited. Seriously.
You can sacrifice some units every 30 seconds, forcing 2-4 forcefields every 30 seconds. Keep doing that for 20 minutes if you want, and the toss will keep up with the forcefields, at no cost to him while you lose units each time.
And at the end, he can still easily lay down 10 forcefields or more, when only 6-7 are really needed to split an army in 2 and crush it, in most cases.
I mean, sure, if you can afford to sac units every 30 seconds, in numbers big enough to force for example 6 forcefields every 30 seconds... Then after about 3 waves sacrificed, the toss will need to warp in some more sentries -_-
|
On March 21 2011 02:51 morimacil wrote:Show nested quote +Even if you don't kill the sentries in this engagement, you have a significant advantage because FFs are not there to save his ass in the next engagement.
Erm...I'll try to give an example. The most recent game that I can remember with MC in it is LiquidRet versus OGSMC. Note how ret pokes in several times and forces MC to commit with forcefields without losing too much. Well note how that doesnt work. He has forcefields to kill lings. He has forcefields to kill the roaches. And then he still has 9 forcefields for the roach-ling attack. When the toss has a high amount of forcefields, like 7-10, then there is really no depleting of forcefields that can be done, at this point, they are pretty much unlimited. Seriously. You can sacrifice some units every 30 seconds, forcing 2-4 forcefields every 30 seconds. Keep doing that for 20 minutes if you want, and the toss will keep up with the forcefields, at no cost to him while you lose units each time. And at the end, he can still easily lay down 10 forcefields or more, when only 6-7 are really needed to split an army in 2 and crush it, in most cases. I mean, sure, if you can afford to sac units every 30 seconds, in numbers big enough to force for example 6 forcefields every 30 seconds... Then after about 3 waves sacrificed, the toss will need to warp in some more sentries -_-
Too busy watching TSL3 now to type out a full reply but I've got another example. Check out 7:30min.
Idra vs Minigun
|
Game 1:
confusedcrib's suggestion & conclusion:
sac an overlord, start making roaches earlier
sentries weren't a main factor to win the game for MC
BUT MCs Gateway placement was really good, if MC intercepts the overlord that doesnt know where to look for the gateways it would be the same situation
and sentries where THE main factor in this 4gate push, the amount of sentries MC had garantied that July couldnt join forces when his Hatch was under attack.
July would have hold without the sentries
Game 2:
confusedcrib's suggestion & conclusion:
scout earlier, get earlier roach upgrades
BUT: after MCs fast expansion he was way behind and though his scout seemed late, it was a pretty fast one considering how much gas overseers cost and how much gas a zerg needs after hitting lair tech, with Hydra Den, Hydra Upgrade, Burrow, Roach Movement, Roach Burrow Movement all being necessary to have a stable army composition as Zerg against Protoss
Still even with the right upgrades and more units I think July could have only won with a double expand after Protoss 1gate expand. MC was just way ahead and could have done 3-4 different pushes all with a similar outcame.
Game 3:
confusedcrib's suggestion & conclusion:
MC should have gone colossus or Templar against the Hydras
BUT: MC showed times and times again that you dont need colossus to beat Hydras of creep, if you have good Forcefield micro. He just didnt expect the drop, was out of position and July could take the game by surprise.
Game 4:
confusedcrib's suggestion & conclusion:
July shouldnt have gone spire and go for a lot of Hydras or roaches with upgrades.
BUT: again MC was already way ahead with his DTs killing lots of units, forcing an early evo chamber + a spinecrawler and early overseers and even killing queen!
A 6gate is hard to hold without being behind, MC being able to counter Hydras with Gateway Units only makes it even harder. July loses.
Game 5:
confusedcrib's suggestion & conclusion:
Upgraded Roach Hydra would have crushed MCs 6gate push easily
BUT: again MC was way ahead after the Forge expand, his Sentry/Stalker Combo killed the "GatewayKillerUnit" Hydralisk without any trouble
Staying on creep wasn't possible as it would have meant that MC could have attacked Julys expansion through the rocks and would have had an even smaller terrain to fight on, making forcefields even more devastating
My Conclusion:
-) always all in against a Protoss Forge expand, as a good Protoss wont give u another chance to attack
-) Blink and Forcefields in the hands of a potent Player make Gateway Units equal to Hydra/roach play, Warpgates give Protoss the same production capacity that a Zerg has (as even 10 Larvae can only produce 8 Units+2overlords. as Roaches are inferior to stalkers and cant shot air I consider this pretty even to 6gateway units)
-) Still I dont think MC has shown us the full potential Blink and FF have, there will be better players with better micro, while Zerg has only Burrow to use for the Roach Hydra Combo, which is inferior to Blink as blinked stalkers are out of range but still shoot, while burrowed roaches cant attack
-) Zerg has to scout exactly what protoss does, while protoss doesnt need any scouting at all when they want to play a pressure build (the only game MC really scouted he lost!!!)
-) Zerg has no tech choices as spire gets denied by Stargate and Gateway play, against a well played 6gate you need all 3roach upgrades, and against Stargate play you need Hydras.
-) Protoss are developing into Zerg 2.0 being able to expand at nearly same speed, having more choices early (5+ different 1base attacks) and midgame(4+ different 2base attacks) and close to the same production capazity if wanted/needed.
I dont want to whine about the MU being imbalanced, BUT imo Protoss just has way too many options in the MU and Protoss mistakes are way more forgiving than Zergs.
PS: I dont want to bash on you confusedcrib, but I think you are way to easy on saying: "July should have done that and he would have won easily" and not taking in consideration that even if July scouts more/earlier he might miss some/many things MC does + MC might just go for "fake buildings" if July keeps on sending overlords in
And I think July didnt play so bad, but MC was just better + luckier (July did never prepare blindly for the gateway attacks, missed the Dark Shrine with his scout, blindly 6gating and July going for burrow late, being at Julys base with his 4gate right before the roaches could get down the ramp)
|
if you notice, in game 1, at 4:46, we can see a scouting overlord being denied by a stalker.
Where is the scouting overlord going to come from? From the top, it was easily denied.
From the left, it would also be easy enough to deny.
From the bottom, its impossible, the map ends there.
And from the right, there is his ramp, with a stalker and 2 sentries, so equally impossible.
Its not that july was bad, and didnt try to scout. He tried to sac an overlord, but it was denied. He tried to poke constantly with lings at the front, but MC kept the extra units hidden.
Yes, july didnt see the nexus cancel, but that didnt matter, because when the nexus was canceled, july did see the army moving out, and was already pumping pure units. So seeing the nexus cancel wouldnt actually have allowed him to react any faster.
Game 2, the scouting overlord just isnt fast enough to be able to see the early nexus from MC. To be fast enough, july would have needed to magically know his opponent's spawning position, and sent the overlord directly there, which obviously is impossible.
He doesnt see the 6 gates, and has absolutely 0 posibility to see what MC is doing, thus he has to get a hydraden. His overseer finally manages to get some vision at 8:30, and only then does he know what hes up against. He instantly makes a bunch of roaches, though it does take him 20 seconds to start burrow. Honestly though, even if it had been started straight away, it wouldnt have been done in time.
Game 4, he sacs an overlord, and he doesnt see the dark shrine -_-
Its easy to suggest that zerg should have scouted better, but honestly, I dont see how he could have done much better than constantly trying to sac overlords, and constantly poking at the front with lings.
And yeah, sure, if you blindly go for masses of roaches and burrow straight after lair, and skip the "useless" hydra den, you can hold off a 6gate push easily enough. But again, thats asking for a zerg to magically know that a 6gate will be coming before he has any posibility to scout it. And then if it wasnt a 6 gate, but it was something else, like for example double stargate, and you have a bunch of roaches with speed and burrow, no more gas, and no hydra den, then you are in the same situation again, you instantly just die, because you failed to magically know exactly what the protoss was doing, without actually having any posibility to scout it out and know for sure before its too late.
Its easy to just say he should have scouted better, but please explain in more detail exactly how he could have scouted better, other than constantly poking with lings, constantly trying to sac overlords, in one game even actually managing to sac an overlord to no effect, and making an overseer right after lair.
Its not like he could have scanned..
|
On March 20 2011 16:17 MrBitter wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 16:13 Active.815 wrote: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? He's saying its not imba, and while they secured MC's victory they wouldnt've been necessary for him to win because of july's mistakes 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.
hrmmm why did I expect the 12 weeks with the pros guy to have an understanding of how RTS works... Really disappointing to see that you missed like 90% of the take away points from the games. Your analysis is a good exampple as to why alot of players are plateauing in SC2 right now
|
I added my responses within the post
On March 21 2011 04:17 Big J wrote:
Game 1:
confusedcrib's suggestion & conclusion:
sac an overlord, start making roaches earlier
sentries weren't a main factor to win the game for MC
BUT MCs Gateway placement was really good, if MC intercepts the overlord that doesnt know where to look for the gateways it would be the same situation
and sentries where THE main factor in this 4gate push, the amount of sentries MC had garantied that July couldnt join forces when his Hatch was under attack.
July would have hold without the sentries
Me: I have said in my follow up posts zerg early game scouting is an issue, and I really do think it needs to be changed, but really July would have had to sac two overlords to spot it, not really realistic. There is no way to tell if he would have held without sentries but I don't really think your analysis contradicts that pumping roaches earlier would have meant July would have been fine which was the main point of my post.
Game 2:
confusedcrib's suggestion & conclusion:
scout earlier, get earlier roach upgrades
BUT: after MCs fast expansion he was way behind and though his scout seemed late, it was a pretty fast one considering how much gas overseers cost and how much gas a zerg needs after hitting lair tech, with Hydra Den, Hydra Upgrade, Burrow, Roach Movement, Roach Burrow Movement all being necessary to have a stable army composition as Zerg against Protoss
Still even with the right upgrades and more units I think July could have only won with a double expand after Protoss 1gate expand. MC was just way ahead and could have done 3-4 different pushes all with a similar outcame.
me: your analysis doesn't contradict mine, either roaches with ups or hydras with ups would have been fine but July didn't commit to either.
Game 3:
confusedcrib's suggestion & conclusion:
MC should have gone colossus or Templar against the Hydras
BUT: MC showed times and times again that you dont need colossus to beat Hydras of creep, if you have good Forcefield micro. He just didnt expect the drop, was out of position and July could take the game by surprise.
me: He hasn't shown that time and time again unless you can link me to another game besides game 5 where this happens, and in this game it was only because july was far out upgraded and did not have range. Until there is colossus or storm hydra's are supreme, hydra drop was just a pure build counter to what MC was doing, he was taking a risk and knew it
Game 4:
confusedcrib's suggestion & conclusion:
July shouldnt have gone spire and go for a lot of Hydras or roaches with upgrades.
BUT: again MC was already way ahead with his DTs killing lots of units, forcing an early evo chamber + a spinecrawler and early overseers and even killing queen!
A 6gate is hard to hold without being behind, MC being able to counter Hydras with Gateway Units only makes it even harder. July loses.
Me: again your analysis doesn't contradict mine. The DTs were a brilliant way to get 6 gate up and July needed either roach or hydra with ups but had not committed to either. Keep in mind I lean towards roaches with burrow to stop 6 gate because hydra timings are later.
Game 5:
confusedcrib's suggestion & conclusion:
Upgraded Roach Hydra would have crushed MCs 6gate push easily
BUT: again MC was way ahead after the Forge expand, his Sentry/Stalker Combo killed the "GatewayKillerUnit" Hydralisk without any trouble
Staying on creep wasn't possible as it would have meant that MC could have attacked Julys expansion through the rocks and would have had an even smaller terrain to fight on, making forcefields even more devastating
Me:I honestly wonder if you read my post, the hydras were at a huge upgrade disadvantage
My Conclusion:
-) always all in against a Protoss Forge expand, as a good Protoss wont give u another chance to attack
I think a double expand would also work, you don't necessarily need to all in but that is a legitimate response.
-) Blink and Forcefields in the hands of a potent Player make Gateway Units equal to Hydra/roach play, Warpgates give Protoss the same production capacity that a Zerg has (as even 10 Larvae can only produce 8 Units+2overlords. as Roaches are inferior to stalkers and cant shot air I consider this pretty even to 6gateway units)
Roach hydra is much stronger than pure gateway
-) Still I dont think MC has shown us the full potential Blink and FF have, there will be better players with better micro, while Zerg has only Burrow to use for the Roach Hydra Combo, which is inferior to Blink as blinked stalkers are out of range but still shoot, while burrowed roaches cant attack
burrowed roaches are better as long as no robo is out, i.e. a 6 warp gate
-) Zerg has to scout exactly what protoss does, while protoss doesnt need any scouting at all when they want to play a pressure build (the only game MC re scouted he lost!!!)
Zerg needs better early game scouting I agree
-) Zerg has no tech choices as spire gets denied by Stargate and Gateway play, against a well played 6gate you need all 3roach upgrades, and against Stargate play you need Hydras.
This is why they need to scout, to choose the right order of your composition.
-) Protoss are developing into Zerg 2.0 being able to expand at nearly same speed, having more choices early (5+ different 1base attacks) and midgame(4+ different 2base attacks) and close to the same production capazity if wanted/needed.
Me: Too early to make metagame claims like that
I dont want to whine about the MU being imbalanced, BUT imo Protoss just has way too many options in the MU and Protoss mistakes are way more forgiving than Zergs.
PS: I dont want to bash on you confusedcrib, but I think you are way to easy on saying: "July should have done that and he would have won easily" and not taking in consideration that even if July scouts more/earlier he might miss some/many things MC does + MC might just go for "fake buildings" if July keeps on sending overlords in
And I think July didnt play so bad, but MC was just better + luckier (July did never prepare blindly for the gateway attacks, missed the Dark Shrine with his scout, blindly 6gating and July going for burrow late, being at Julys base with his 4gate right before the roaches could get down the ramp)[/QUOTE]
thank you for your legitimate response, but I don't necessarily think we are disagreeing about as many things as your "BUT"s imply
|
Yeah, we get your point confusedcrib
July should have commited earlier to the correct response, before he had any chance to see what MC was actually doing, and then he would have been fine.
I dont disagree.
The fact of the matter is, as soon as he had some actual scouting information, july fully commited to the correct response, and it wasnt enough. He would have needed to start fully commiting to the correct response, before he had any chance to see what the actual threat was.
Which is exactly as hard and as much of a gamble as it sounds.
|
The reason people hate FF--
It puts the game in ONE players hand... Examples..
Two equal armies meet Toss is good with FF and theres nothing you can really do
Two equal armies meet toss is bad with FF and you roll him
those are the two outcomes :/
|
On March 21 2011 05:05 Jayrod wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 16:17 MrBitter wrote:On March 20 2011 16:13 Active.815 wrote: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? He's saying its not imba, and while they secured MC's victory they wouldnt've been necessary for him to win because of july's mistakes 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. hrmmm why did I expect the 12 weeks with the pros guy to have an understanding of how RTS works... Really disappointing to see that you missed like 90% of the take away points from the games. Your analysis is a good exampple as to why alot of players are plateauing in SC2 right now
Go rewatch the first game of the Finals, skip to the 50:45 mark. If July's units could have gotten down the ramp, he could have saved his expansion and beaten the 4gate - although all his natural's drones died, it was still a winnable position.
|
On March 21 2011 05:21 morimacil wrote:
Yeah, we get your point confusedcrib
July should have commited earlier to the correct response, before he had any chance to see what MC was actually doing, and then he would have been fine.
I dont disagree.
The fact of the matter is, as soon as he had some actual scouting information, july fully commited to the correct response, and it wasnt enough. He would have needed to start fully commiting to the correct response, before he had any chance to see what the actual threat was.
Which is exactly as hard and as much of a gamble as it sounds.
Haha I actually agree with you, people should complain about Zerg scouting abilities, not Forcefield.
|
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?
why start being bm ? its his oppinion.
i say in 1-2 games the FF was deciding, the others it was 100% not.
in the games where FF was deciding, july made HUUUGE mistakes on position offcreep etc etc so ff just did so well cause of julys mistakes
sometimes it feels like p makes storms, dropps, tech to tech3 fokus with immortel on roaches, blink, position rewarp while fight forcefields
and often z just do MASS UNITS and go A MOVE and then z is wonder why they cant win with tech1 tech2 units when making a move ... i really feel alot of zergs have to improve the way they fight
i am not a zerg but i think about double nydus, or drop in p main while p go out to attack and THEN make nydus JUST to go back (so u cant kill it to not get "dropped") and be back in time to defend while kicked half main
etc etc even 1 nydus with 10 zerglings in a fight would not make a big difference but in the p main they would ...
also attacks from more sides (only when super big space cause of forcefields ?) and when p play so sentry heavy a FEW ultras (even if u just use them for forcefield break) perhaps even ultra drop on forcefield
i just trolling some ideas but rly all i see is god damn zerg a move
|
Well I think we dont disagree on so many points as my capital BUTs might suggest.
But I think that July did a pretty good job reacting as soon as he saw MCs 6gates, still he got crushed.
Where I disagree with you is, when I read that "he should have made more/earlier..." as he simply had no clue what was coming at him, and when you dont go hydralisks after lair and instead go for roaches+fast upgrades you might get a 4gate+SG attack with 3-4 VoidRays or simply 5-6phoenix in your face and straight up lose because you wanted burrow a little earlier at the cost of not getting any variation.
And I dont think that Hydras with Range are superior to a good Warpgate player, as through Forcefields only half of the hydras will fight against the stalkers which lose in a 1v1 situation without micro only barely!
The reason for Hydras beeing considered GatewayKillers is, that the Hydras are smaller than Stalkers which means there are more actual fighting units for the zerg, but good Forcefields do even that out.
|
On March 21 2011 05:38 confusedcrib wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2011 05:21 morimacil wrote:
Yeah, we get your point confusedcrib
July should have commited earlier to the correct response, before he had any chance to see what MC was actually doing, and then he would have been fine.
I dont disagree.
The fact of the matter is, as soon as he had some actual scouting information, july fully commited to the correct response, and it wasnt enough. He would have needed to start fully commiting to the correct response, before he had any chance to see what the actual threat was.
Which is exactly as hard and as much of a gamble as it sounds. Haha I actually agree with you, people should complain about Zerg scouting abilities, not Forcefield.
Well the problem can be seen either way really.
I mean, if forcefields were strong defensively, but not offensively for example, then making a bunch of sentries to fake a 3gate expand, but instead attacking with them would be a lot weaker.
And you wouldnt need burrow to deal with a 6gate push, so you wouldnt have to scout it in advance to be able to react to it.
So really, both options are viable. Better scouting to be able to actually see the incoming sentry push, and react in time, or less powerful sentries, so that the current scouting is enough to react in time.
|
and often z just do MASS UNITS and go A MOVE and then z is wonder why they cant win with tech1 tech2 units when making a move ... i really feel alot of zergs have to improve the way they fight i am not a zerg but i think about double nydus, or drop in p main while p go out to attack and THEN make nydus JUST to go back (so u cant kill it to not get "dropped") and be back in time to defend while kicked half main etc etc even 1 nydus with 10 zerglings in a fight would not make a big difference but in the p main they would ... also attacks from more sides (only when super big space cause of forcefields ?) and when p play so sentry heavy a FEW ultras (even if u just use them for forcefield break) perhaps even ultra drop on forcefield i just trolling some ideas but rly all i see is god damn zerg a move
Yeah those are nice ideas, but at least I were never able to pull them off:
Nydus Worms are expensive and if you ever where in the position when you went back to defend and those units just couldn come out fast enough as it doesnt matter if you unload a Zergling or a Ultra you get really pissed with that very gas heavy style of countering.
And Ultras against Forcefields: going Infestation Pit+ Hive+ Ultra Cavern takes around 4min. Then you need another 70sec for an Ultra to spawn. Its impossible to rush them against Gateway attacks and low ultra numbers get outmicroed by stalkers, so your kind of back to Zergling/baneling, roach, hydra with FF being strong against all of them (except for Roaches with Burrow and without detection)
|
I was actually disappointed that July didn't just go for a baneling bust/roach rush in each of the games, I felt like MC's openings were kind of greedy in a couple of the games...anyone who actually knows what they are talking about (eg. not some plat n00b like me) want to comment on this?
|
Are you kidding me? Am I the only one who watched MC repeated FF the ramp and trap more than 50 roaches in the entire series with FFs? FFs are a non-factor? Really?
|
The FFs were a giant factor in games 1, 2, and 5. Replace the army with a more stalker centered army instead of the sentries and we would have seen a 4-1 July over MC.
Protoss army is too weak with FFs and too powerful with FFs. It's kinda like there is no happy medium.
tbh I'd be quite surprised if the OP was above platinum level.
|
On March 21 2011 06:34 lkjewq wrote:
The FFs were a giant factor in games 1, 2, and 5. Replace the army with a more stalker centered army instead of the sentries and we would have seen a 4-1 July over MC.
Protoss army is too weak with FFs and too powerful with FFs. It's kinda like there is no happy medium.
tbh I'd be quite surprised if the OP was above platinum level.
You can't just replace sentries with stalkers... Sentries are a critical unit to Protoss armies, and removing Force Fields is not the answer.
July simply was not ready for MC's sentry heavy style, and didn't react properly. Like ConfusedCrib said, there are ways July could have reacted to counter MC more effectively.
|
i am not a zerg but i think about double nydus, or drop in p main while p go out to attack and THEN make nydus JUST to go back (so u cant kill it to not get "dropped") and be back in time to defend while kicked half main
etc etc even 1 nydus with 10 zerglings in a fight would not make a big difference but in the p main they would ...
also attacks from more sides (only when super big space cause of forcefields ?) and when p play so sentry heavy a FEW ultras (even if u just use them for forcefield break) perhaps even ultra drop on forcefield
Great! What a stroke of GENIUS....I mean...how dumb we all are, poor mortals who DO play zerg and havent thought about using NYDUS, cmon! July and Nestea and all the rest really owe you one man!
Now on a more serious note: Im fed up of hearing non-zerg players cry "NYDUS!" whenever a zerg reports serious problems. I mean...yeah, nydus isnt used much and its a flashy and cool thing...but that doesnt make it the be all end all.
Moreover, nydus is really expensive in gas thats early on, takes FOREVER to pop, can be killed by workers before it does pop AAND screeches loudly before starting to pump out units one zergling at a time. I wont even talk abput double nyduses at that stage of the game: it equals zero roaches for your defense.
A MESSAGE TO ALL THE ZERG PLAYERS WHO ARE FED UP OF HEARING THE WORD NYDUS FROM NON-ZERG PLAYERS: in the future, each time a toss complains about how difficult it is to win against zerg or terran...tell him to use HALLUCINATION more!! Or WARP PRISM!! Yeah...who doesnt think a good warp prism in the back o´the base will seal the deal??
|
On March 21 2011 06:41 Venomous Drone wrote:Show nested quote +i am not a zerg but i think about double nydus, or drop in p main while p go out to attack and THEN make nydus JUST to go back (so u cant kill it to not get "dropped") and be back in time to defend while kicked half main
etc etc even 1 nydus with 10 zerglings in a fight would not make a big difference but in the p main they would ...
also attacks from more sides (only when super big space cause of forcefields ?) and when p play so sentry heavy a FEW ultras (even if u just use them for forcefield break) perhaps even ultra drop on forcefield Great! What a stroke of GENIUS....I mean...how dumb we all are, poor mortals who DO play zerg and havent thought about using NYDUS, cmon! July and Nestea and all the rest really owe you one man! Now on a more serious note: Im fed up of hearing non-zerg players cry "NYDUS!" whenever a zerg reports serious problems. I mean...yeah, nydus isnt used much and its a flashy and cool thing...but that doesnt make it the be all end all. Moreover, nydus is really expensive in gas thats early on, takes FOREVER to pop, can be killed by workers before it does pop AAND screeches loudly before starting to pump out units one zergling at a time. I wont even talk abput double nyduses at that stage of the game: it equals zero roaches for your defense. A MESSAGE TO ALL THE ZERG PLAYERS WHO ARE FED UP OF HEARING THE WORD NYDUS FROM NON-ZERG PLAYERS: in the future, each time a toss complains about how difficult it is to win against zerg or terran...tell him to use HALLUCINATION more!! Or WARP PRISM!! Yeah...who doesnt think a good warp prism in the back o´the base will seal the deal??
But just blindly labeling a unit as OP is no way to play a strategy game. It's through trying out the lesser used strategies that the game evolves.
|
On March 21 2011 03:12 setmeal wrote:Too busy watching TSL3 now to type out a full reply but I've got another example. Check out 7:30min. Idra vs Minigun
Like your other example, Zerg got absolutely stomped. And at the end, Idra's demise was hugely helped along by a bunch of baneling-eliminating FFs.
I honestly don't know enough to declare anything imbalanced, but there's a ridiculously huge edge in flexibility and forgiving strategies in this matchup. As a zerg player, this is what frustrates me (I lose to a lot of protoss who one-base), but it's a fact that is pervasive through all levels of play.
The feel I got from these matches was that July and MC like to play very similar styles. I'd agree that July didn't look like himself - probably and reasonably scared of the power of MC aggression (their history doesn't help July any) - but MC out-July'd July. He was excessively, endlessly aggressive with low-tech units and gateway is way stronger than hatch tech. July didn't have time to tech or upgrade, he was in constant crisis mode because of MC's aggression.
Basically, the exact same persistent aggression that allowed July to roll all those great Terrans this season was utilized against him to great effect.
While it took MC's typical perfect execution to make July look that bad (which is the main reason I am not convinced this matchup is imbalanced), you really have to wonder if there was anything that could have happened differently to give July a win. OPs suggestions certainly ring hollow, as even if July had the maphack he would have needed to read the BossToss's play, a successful defense isn't going to give you a win over MC, and these builds really weren't all-in.
|
Thanks for the well-thought OP. I think you pinpointed the ways in which July fell apart, and give proper credit to MC. Would be nice to hear a bunch of pros elaborate further on what happened with the builds, and why some of the choices were made. I think more than anything the games were mental warfare, and MCs initiative, planning and confidence crushed July.
|
Lesser used strats are lesser used because there is no actuall gain.
Metagame currently doesnt shift because of lesser used strategies getting more dominant but rather dominant strategies getting pretty much blindly countered.
PvZ is a prime example for such a shifting metagame.
A some months ago there was no dreaded deathball. Muta ling was actually a fine strategy.
Protoss learned to defend muta ling
Protoss learned how to FE safely
Protoss learned how to build an "invincible" army
What did zerg learn in all that time?
Most people like to state that the game is still young and zerg still have to learn, to evolve and come up with great new strategies.
But that doesnt happen. Zerg still sticks with the same strategies which they had start on. "Get more income, get a shitload of units and keep throwing them at your opponent untill he chokes on it"
Protoss learned how to cut the unit cake in smaller more mouthfriedly pieces.
Nearly every single change in the zerg metagame was not credited to a innovative player, but to actual buffs/nerf in the game.
Zerg just doesnt feel "complete".
|
On March 21 2011 07:27 Charon1979 wrote:
Zerg just doesnt feel "complete".
That's an interesting way to state the issue. I tend to agree. MrBitter got specific with what the missing piece was: an army your opponent can't attack into.
Roaches are flexible, but Zerg doesn't have anything like a siege tank or colossus.
|
i have to agree with all the zergs here. A large factor why zerg couldnt react properly is that they are playing blind. Sacing an overlord wont cut it most of the times especially with a very good protoss denying scouting and building placements. poking up the ramp to check unit composition is only good when toss is playing shitty showing you his cards.
In the finals, it does look like FF is so strong but what really makes it strong/glaring is that zerg isnt prepared.
|
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.
|
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
|
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.
|
On March 21 2011 08:45 confusedcrib wrote:Show nested quote +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
Ehh maybe, the OP kinda came off to me as this is somehow July's fault.
|
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.
|
Canada13388 Posts
On March 20 2011 16:17 MrBitter wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 16:13 Active.815 wrote: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? He's saying its not imba, and while they secured MC's victory they wouldnt've been necessary for him to win because of july's mistakes 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.
|
|
|
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.
|
I dont think the word "easily" means what you think it means
|
I agree pretty much completely with the general idea of the OP. Going through the games looking at possibilities each player had at the given times from an ERROR mindset, not an IMBA mindset.
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"
|
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. 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.
|
All MC proved is that you can win GSL by 4 gating and 6 gating everyone
|
Protoss propaganda under the guise of ambiguous game analysis...I see what you did there.
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?
|
thanks for the analysis 
|
iNfeRnaL
Germany1908 Posts
On March 21 2011 09:01 1Eris1 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2011 08:45 confusedcrib wrote: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 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.
|
On March 21 2011 11:00 iNfeRnaL wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2011 09:01 1Eris1 wrote:On March 21 2011 08:45 confusedcrib wrote: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 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.
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.
|
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.
|
On March 21 2011 11:05 1Eris1 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2011 11:00 iNfeRnaL wrote:On March 21 2011 09:01 1Eris1 wrote:On March 21 2011 08:45 confusedcrib wrote: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 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. 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.
|
I like the OP, and I also can understand the logic of some of the counterarguments (i.e. the vulnerability of the hydra, the fact that early-midgame scouting is more important for zerg than protoss). But I think the problem everyone is having here is that a single series between only two players is the basis for the argument. For it to be a controlled experiment, we would need some perfect maps, a large sample size, two players of exactly equal skill, the players to feel the same way under pressure, and the matchup to be fully developed (which it isn't at this point). If we watched 1000 games between the top 1000 Protoss and the top 1000 Zergs in the world, then a better argument can be made. But I think MC just played better, to put it simply. Imbalance can account for winning a battle, perhaps, but not winning 4 of 5 games.
+ 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?
|
+ 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?
+ Show Spoiler +Let's be fair, both the games Jinro lost he went CC first and got baneling busted. Hardly a matter of playing a better game so much as trying a stupid build and having it thrown back in your face imo
|
Don't say JulyZerg could have scouted better.
Don't say JulyZerg had good scouting.
These two statements do not conflict with each other.
What does it mean when you combine these two statements?
He scouted as best as he could.
This is the way the game is built.
Zerg can't scout building-blocked-cliff-ramped main bases with ground units.
Overlords are slow and take a large amount of time to scout someone's entire main base.
Overlord Speed and Overseer both require Lair, which will not be complete before the 8 min mark.
Going 3 warpgates vs 6 warpgates requires wildly different responses from the Zerg player.
If the Zerg doesn't scout them all, he is at huge risk for losing the game.
Zerg is reactionary, which isn't a bad thing.
It is a bad thing when Zerg's scouting is easily denied.
This is not balance discussion.
This is game design.
|
On March 21 2011 11:42 Darclite wrote:I like the OP, and I also can understand the logic of some of the counterarguments (i.e. the vulnerability of the hydra, the fact that early-midgame scouting is more important for zerg than protoss). But I think the problem everyone is having here is that a single series between only two players is the basis for the argument. For it to be a controlled experiment, we would need some perfect maps, a large sample size, two players of exactly equal skill, the players to feel the same way under pressure, and the matchup to be fully developed (which it isn't at this point). If we watched 1000 games between the top 1000 Protoss and the top 1000 Zergs in the world, then a better argument can be made. But I think MC just played better, to put it simply. Imbalance can account for winning a battle, perhaps, but not winning 4 of 5 games. + 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?
Well he won his games in very similar manners, heavy early warp gate pushes, almost always with numerous sentries and hence FF abuse.
Not necessarily saying that is absolutely imbalanced, but if a given player was to use overpowered strategy X over and over and win, that doesn't make him good.
I will say MC is probably the better player, but it was really disappointing to see him win in almost the same way every game. I'm not very comfortable with zerg's ability to deal with early sentry abuse at the moment.
|
On March 21 2011 11:26 iNfeRnaL wrote:Show nested quote +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.
I do agree with your point on TvP, but not for ZvP. In ZvP, the only early things you have to fear are roach allins, baneling busts, and lol 6 pools.
Forge FE is a risky build, comparable to 14 hatch. There is a reason most zergs do speedling expands now, simply because most all ins are easier to hold off, and 14 hatch loses mathetmatically to 2 gate on a lot of maps.
Roach all ins are almost always a given if the roach warren goes down before the hatchery (easily scoutable with a probe). Any later on roach all in comes down to micro, and a good 3 gate expand can hold it off, or be stopped with immortals or voidrays.
A baneling bust is slightly harder to scout, but the timings still usually work out in that a probe can get in there. Even if you don't scout a baneling bust, it is still stopabble with good forcefield placement//good micro.
I don't see any reason to comment on 6 pools.
Now on the flipside, zerg has to watch for
4 gate (multiple variations)
4 gate blink stalker (slightly different then 4 gate)
DT rush
VR openers
Phoenix openers
1 stargate+3gate all ins
All of these require different responses. Where as for the few things protoss has to be worried about, a good 3 gate sentry expand+slight variation depending on what is scouted can hold them off.
|
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.
Only the first match, because that's the only time his army was actually denied being able to attack when the ramp was blocked off. In the other games, it wasn't the FFs but rather just the sheer advantage MC had. MC would hit way before July was ready. Even if his Roaches were able to micro away from Zealots and group up, MC still would have more Stalkers (if you replace Sentries with Stalkers) than Roaches, and Stalkers > Roaches (1 to 1 comparison).
|
July's scouting wasn't that good. he narrowly missed the DT shrine on crossfire which would of greatly changed what he was doing.
I'm betting that the first game with the nexus cancel really got in his head, and he just never quite recovered.
|
iNfeRnaL
Germany1908 Posts
On March 21 2011 12:33 1Eris1 wrote:
All of these require different responses. Where as for the few things protoss has to be worried about, a good 3 gate sentry expand+slight variation depending on what is scouted can hold them off.
As I already said, I agree on you with Protoss having a bit more possible openings there.
But atleast you CAN scout and react to them, I cannot scout what I listed unless the Zerg is also known as captain obvious. (if a Zerg uses pool first as July did, he will always get 4 or more zerglings to get mapcontrol and/or deny a pylon -> fake hatchery, cancel, control watch towers, snipe new probes, roach allin [not hard to do, really])
As for the banelings, you said I can stop them with some really good FF's etc - you're aware of the fact that a baneling bust usually does occur if you only have like one sentry? That's the point of it.
And the only thing I could possibly do against it is put even more buildings behind or get a shit ton of cannons, simply because I do not even have the possibility of "getting out a handful of sentrys" after a forge FE, keep in mind you'll be on one Gate for quite a long time in that kind of situation.
And that exactly is the big risk everyone still takes by going forge fe.
I also do not really like the fact that you kind of dismissed my whole argument about it being a problem of SC2 itself more than being a race problem. I don't like all this "oh my race is so much worse than yours at x" behaviour, even tho my posts kinda seem to "defend" Protoss, but that's not really the case I'm just trying to point out some things that might not be too obvious from a Zerg's perspective.
And yet again, I do not disagree with you on the fact that Zerg's scouting should be slightly improved (maybe make overlords a liiiiiil faster for example), I'm just trying to say Protoss could need an improvement in this regard as well.
Even Terrans, despite having the most options to scout have trouble doing so before a certain amount of time IMO.
|
|
|
[b]Protoss does not need to know what is going on until they have an observer out.
Now on the flipside, zerg has to watch for
4 gate (multiple variations)
4 gate blink stalker (slightly different then 4 gate)
DT rush
VR openers
Phoenix openers
1 stargate+3gate all ins
All of these require different responses. Where as for the few things protoss has to be worried about, a good 3 gate sentry expand+slight variation depending on what is scouted can hold them off.
4 gate is easily scouted with mass energy on nexus. (Variations are a bit harder)
4 gate blink stalker is easily scouted since he will have 2-3 stalker and no sentry or very few (1-2) which is already strange. If you arent happy enough, put a ling up the ramp and scout 5-6 stalker.
DT rush is laughable... its like 6 pool. Even if not scouted, you should have lair up or at least a bit of gamesense to see he hasnt expended + he isnt 4 gating...
VR and Phoenix openers can be dealt with 2-3 queen. Voidray are easier, phoenix hit later (since you need minimum 3-4 to do damage), the combinations of both is a all-in. Scout or not... if you hold it you win.
1 stargate + 3 gate ? Who does that. You'll see less sentry than usual again and less gas unit overall.
Dont say scouting is soooo hard when a lot of these build can be scouted or at least you can eliminate to 1-2 that have the same response.
Every race has a hard time scouting but dont say zerg is harder.[/QUOTE]
|
[b]
Now on the flipside, zerg has to watch for
4 gate (multiple variations)
4 gate blink stalker (slightly different then 4 gate)
DT rush
VR openers
Phoenix openers
1 stargate+3gate all ins
All of these require different responses. Where as for the few things protoss has to be worried about, a good 3 gate sentry expand+slight variation depending on what is scouted can hold them off.
well honestly you have to scout a few variables.
your initial drone scout should be looking at the chrono boosting. if its going heavy on probes id say thats leaning towards a 3 gate expand.
then you want to see his 2nd unit that will be chasing out your drone. if its a stalker this leads heavily towards a 4 gate or maybe stargate.
third priority of scouting is poking up the ramp with a single zergling very quickly. this will show you if his cyber core is being chronoboosted. now almost every build uses at least ONE boost on warpgate tech so its not an automatic, but by observing his energy usage earlier on this should be painting a better picture.
4th thing i would be scouting with is an overlord around 5:30 or so. you want to see if you can get a gateway count. sometimes you might not see anything, but you will at least see the units that are killing your overlord which can be a form of a tell as explained before.
lastly you if you are not being 4 gated at the 5:50 6 minute mark you want to be looking for an expand. if you see it and sentries you know what is up (minus some oGsMC trickery) and if you do not see an expo going up after 6:30 you are gonna be watching for voidray or dark templar rushing. both of which can be helped with some spore crawlers.
thats 5 major points that will help you A LOT. as a protoss player i know i do an equal ammount of scouting when im playing and i dont think its too much to ask for. but as far as reacting to this information you are asking the wrong person.
|
You guys realize MC dominates EVERY match-up right? His PvT is ridiculous, he has shown to be very abusive and effective in PvP, and his PvZ timings are oh so powerful. It's not the race, it's the player. July was just outclassed in his understanding of the game.
*read a few pages, didn't read all*
OP is trying to say forcefields were not the reason MC won, it was his build vs July's build that won. They helped him win, yes, but they did not turn the tide from a huge disadvantage into MC's favour. Yes, they are effective, yes they are good, no they are not imbalanced. That is what he's trying to say.
Zerg is supposed to be reactionary. If you have a problem, play a different game because this will never ever, ever change.
|
On March 20 2011 22:18 avilo wrote:
I didn't see the finals, but from reading the OP, it seems he's totally unqualified to be analyzing the finals. Not to mention entirely downplaying just how strong forcefields are, and in the one analysis of why july won he says july "deserved the win by making hydras."
Also, just like 50 other people are gonna post, the OP doesn't know what he's talking about when he says getting zealot/stalkers instead of sentries would have the same result. That's obviously not the case.
yeah...
QFT
I did watch the finals though.
FF's were great. MC's decision making was great. The current state of Zerg is atrocious.
Zerg is definitely not broken; but it is definitely at a disadvantage with two players of equal skill > Diamond.
All hail patch 1.3 when Zerg finally has a spell that can turn battles to their favor!
It's just far too easy to Protoss and Terran to be abusive. How can a race be the worst defensively AND the worst offensively? WTF?!
In chess we see that the initiative is often worth more than a pawn to grandmasters... that's in a game with full knowledge available... so let's not kid ourselves into thinking that Zerg being 'reactionary' in a game with limited knowledge is somehow a 'strength.'
|
iNfeRnaL
Germany1908 Posts
On March 21 2011 14:51 ChoboCop wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 22:18 avilo wrote:
I didn't see the finals, but from reading the OP, it seems he's totally unqualified to be analyzing the finals. Not to mention entirely downplaying just how strong forcefields are, and in the one analysis of why july won he says july "deserved the win by making hydras."
Also, just like 50 other people are gonna post, the OP doesn't know what he's talking about when he says getting zealot/stalkers instead of sentries would have the same result. That's obviously not the case.
yeah... QFT I did watch the finals though. FF's were great. MC's decision making was great. The current state of Zerg is atrocious.
It really, really baffles me how many people are unable to read proper, yet again.
I'm not even trying to insult you here, but you definitely missunderstood what the op was trying to say. He never said that MC's FF's weren't great at all, he said that MC's buildorders were so good and so well timed (or that July was off so much, put it however you want to!) that even if you put the equal amount of resources which had been used for Sentrys into Stalker or Zealot, he would have still won the battles and I do agree with him on it. (Even tho that's a LOT of theorycrafting there!)
That is atleast the case for games 2, 4 and 5.
For game 1, yes the FF's on the choke made it possible for MC to kill that hatchery which would not have been possible without FF's - but come on, the whole 4 gate wouldn't have been possible if July hadn't only realized it is a 4gate when MC had already completed half of the distance he needed to reach July's natural.
edit: minor typo's ioi
|
Uhhh, how can he spend on the expo to fake July out and still just roll over him? -_-
Also, July ovie scouted in the dt game but just missed seeing it? Was he supposed to send multiple ovies from all directions to MAKE SURE he didn't miss anything?
Protoss doesn't really need to scout zerg... they just take the initiative with a timing attack and have a tier 1 unit that can cut your entire army in half and a choice of 3 tier 2 units that super-hard-counter.
Terran and Protoss have the ability to pressure and attack without being allin.
I challenge you to describe some zerg strategies that people cry OP/imba about... if you do, please compare the difficulty in execution versus say bancheese or 4gate or any of the 10+ attacks zerg just insta-loses to if they miss an injection or scouting is unlucky...
|
On March 20 2011 17:48 babysimba wrote:
Right now the state of PvZ is like a game of luck with zerg on the losing end. For zerg to compete in a macro game with protoss, zerg needs to cut corners and have way more drones than protoss. Unlike in ZvT, when u can actually compete with equal amt. of drones. Larger army in ZvT means you can actually crush any smaller army moving out and proceed to drone up or even attack straight into their natural. Whereas in ZvP, the defensive capabilities of toss is just too strong. The only choice zerg has is to fend off any attacks protoss throw at them at the last minute. If toss knows you have a larger army than expected, he will just fall back and turtle knowing hes ahead of economy. And it's not really possible to kill any army moving out because they can just forcefield and retreat. Walking on an even more thin line than in ZvT for the decision between droning and army, this is reason why weird protoss timing attacks are so strong.
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
I agree with this a lot. MC is a better player then July, especially compared to the way that July played in the finals, but what was listed here is the reasons zerg has a lot of trouble in the zvp matchup.I find, in many of my games, even if I don't over react to protential timing attacks, and make it to the late game against a protoss with equal or better economy and upgrades, I can still do lose to a max push at least as often as not. There are really no bad timings in the game for protoss, but it is quite a minefield for zerg. Its an incrediably fragile matchup for a lot of reasons. July played poorly in the finals, but he reacted very similarily to the way most zergs react when playing defensively against protoss.
|
Question: July went speedling expand every single game, but he never used it. Why didn't he try to kill MC's expo in game 1?
|
iNfeRnaL
Germany1908 Posts
On March 21 2011 15:17 ChoboCop wrote:
Uhhh, how can he spend on the expo to fake July out and still just roll over him? -_-
It was like 30 minerals lost. I think you overestimate how much money you lose for cancelling.
He remade the nexus as 4 Stalkers basically. If you fail to understand this, I am sorry for you.
I challenge you to describe some zerg strategies that people cry OP/imba about... if you do, please compare the difficulty in execution versus say bancheese or 4gate or any of the 10+ attacks zerg just insta-loses to if they miss an injection or scouting is unlucky...
And no, I will not take the challenge because any kind of Imba discussion is simply not worth my time, because in my book you have no fucking right to cry imba until you are at the very top.
If MVP would say that Protoss is so imba, that would maybe be an opinion that I would remotely care about.
If your average TL.netter (read: you in this case.) does that, it is most likely (read: in 99,999999% of all cases) just because a better player outclassed you.
There you got what you call "imba".
|
On March 21 2011 15:53 Ribbon wrote:
Question: July went speedling expand every single game, but he never used it. Why didn't he try to kill MC's expo in game 1?
Because MC had 7 sentries, which makes him immune to all melee units.
|
On March 21 2011 17:15 morimacil wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2011 15:53 Ribbon wrote:
Question: July went speedling expand every single game, but he never used it. Why didn't he try to kill MC's expo in game 1? Because MC had 7 sentries, which makes him immune to all melee units.
1. Did July know that?
2. The expo is wide open on Metal. Defending it with Sentries would have used up too many FFs and severely weakened his push. Not defending his "expo" would've tipped his hand.
|
???
Of course july knew MC had sentries. MC even did his very best to show the sentries to july.
Id doesnt really matter if the push ends up being weaker, if the reason for that is that the zerg overproduced speedlings, and you killed all of them.
|
iNfeRnaL
Germany1908 Posts
On March 21 2011 17:29 Ribbon wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2011 17:15 morimacil wrote:On March 21 2011 15:53 Ribbon wrote:
Question: July went speedling expand every single game, but he never used it. Why didn't he try to kill MC's expo in game 1? Because MC had 7 sentries, which makes him immune to all melee units. 1. Did July know that? 2. The expo is wide open on Metal. Defending it with Sentries would have used up too many FFs and severely weakened his push. Not defending his "expo" would've tipped his hand.
1. Did you see the actual games?
2. He could've defended an actual speedling rush with those 7 sentrys, still cancel the nexus after and have an even more critical push because you've pumped out a lot of Zerglings and potentially even lost those instead of droning up to get enough sunkens and roaches in time.
Regarding your very first question, please try to Speedling rush ANY Master league protoss that goes 3 gate sentry expo. Now keep in mind that MC has the best micro of all Protoss in the world right now.
What does this tell you?
|
I am zerg player and I mostly agree with the OP. July made some big mistakes and MC almost made none. So, MC deserved to win this series. I don't understand e.g. why july was always making lingspeed that early even when MC was going nexus first (or very early nexus).
+ Burrow does help.
Apart from that I still feel that some minor changes should be made in order to help Zerg out a little bit. The problem is that Zerg has not room to make any small errors or they lose. The margin of error is smaller than in the other races.
|
Apart from that I still feel that some minor changes should be made in order to help Zerg out a little bit. The problem is that Zerg has not room to make any small errors or they lose. The margin of error is smaller than in the other races.
yeah exactly! Thats exactly what I think too. ZvP isn't OP in a way because Zerg can react to everything Protoss does, but it's way harder to decide what to do and way more unforgiving to make mistakes.
Just some examples:
Protoss goes for VoidRays - Zerg goes for Hydras: as protoss u just add the VoidRay to your Army because its still a great damage dealer, and go into defensive mode
Zerg goes for Spire - Protoss goes for 6gate: Zerg is dead
Protoss goes for fast Collosus - Zerg goes for a heavy Roach attack: Protoss can hold
Zerg goes for Roach - Protoss goes for VoidRay: Zerg loses
I just think that 1-2minor changes like putting overlordspeed or/and burrow to hatch-tech would just make it so much easier for Zerg to react and you would have more units than speedling on hatch tech.
|
What I loved was that it took so many rounds of FF to kill july's units because sentries do such crap damage. MC's macro so good he was able to outproduce July even while building units at 100gas a pop. It was like watching root.destiny kill bronzies with queens.
Thank god MC didn't play a macro game so as to not humiliate July. MC macro so good.
|
In chess we see that the initiative is often worth more than a pawn to grandmasters... that's in a game with full knowledge available... so let's not kid ourselves into thinking that Zerg being 'reactionary' in a game with limited knowledge is somehow a 'strength.'
The only chance for July to win in these games was for MC to make a large mistake. (see: hydra drop)
|
On March 22 2011 01:29 ChoboCop wrote:
In chess we see that the initiative is often worth more than a pawn to grandmasters... that's in a game with full knowledge available... so let's not kid ourselves into thinking t
Yeah, it's a fucking imbalance. Plain and simple.
|
yeah so in game one keeping units from his main away for more then a minute TOTALLY wasnt a factor
|
The only chance for July to win in these games was for MC to make a large mistake. (see: hydra drop)
Thats not true. It was a guessing game since MC denied scouting.
If MC had made a mistake, then sure, july could have capitalized on it. But if hed guessed right, then it would have worked too.
For example, after his lair finished, he got a fast hydraden, and as soon as he got scouting info, he canceled hydra range, and got burrow and roaches, and died, because it was too late.
Apparently, his guess was starport, and he got a fast hydraden. If he had blindly gotten burrow and a bunch of roaches instead, well he would have had a good chance of winning the game.
In game 1 for example, he got an evochamber and a pretty fast lair. So his money was probably on phoenixes, or DTs. If instead, hed gotten more roaches and/or spines, by blindly guessing it was going to be a 4gate, hed have been fine.
Either the toss makes a mistake, and lets zerg get the needed information, or zerg has to make a blind guess. But if zerg guessed correctly, then zerg does have a chance at winning.
And as long as in 50% of the games, either toss makes a mistake, or zergs guess correctly, then the game will be "balanced", at least according to the blizzard standard for balance.
|
The fact every 'why its not imba' basically revolves around stating force field did not do much that game inadvertently proves the exact opposite.
Why was it not 'roaches are not imba because x, stalkers not imba because y'
No, every one was 'ff did little this game, except stopping a few x'
|
Saying FF is imba is like saying zergling speed is imba.
The mere presence of zergling speed defines build orders, building placement and early game map control.
There is a reason that the first question you ask yourself about a FE build is "but what about speedlings?"
but people accept it because that's how the game was designed.
FF allows the race with the fewest units to create tactically favored positions as to allow their small number of units to go toe to toe with the enemy. Most of the time July was outnumbered even without forcefields. In game 1 the ramp block prevented only 2 roaches from joining the fight. By the time the nat was finished, that's when a substantial number of roaches hatched. July simply built too little too late. That's what it was for most of the game. Not enough dudes even without forcefields. The forcefields just made him look bronze.
Zerg needed better macro that game is all.
|
On March 21 2011 13:07 iNfeRnaL wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2011 12:33 1Eris1 wrote:
All of these require different responses. Where as for the few things protoss has to be worried about, a good 3 gate sentry expand+slight variation depending on what is scouted can hold them off.
As I already said, I agree on you with Protoss having a bit more possible openings there. But atleast you CAN scout and react to them, I cannot scout what I listed unless the Zerg is also known as captain obvious. (if a Zerg uses pool first as July did, he will always get 4 or more zerglings to get mapcontrol and/or deny a pylon -> fake hatchery, cancel, control watch towers, snipe new probes, roach allin [not hard to do, really]) As for the banelings, you said I can stop them with some really good FF's etc - you're aware of the fact that a baneling bust usually does occur if you only have like one sentry? That's the point of it. And the only thing I could possibly do against it is put even more buildings behind or get a shit ton of cannons, simply because I do not even have the possibility of "getting out a handful of sentrys" after a forge FE, keep in mind you'll be on one Gate for quite a long time in that kind of situation. And that exactly is the big risk everyone still takes by going forge fe. I also do not really like the fact that you kind of dismissed my whole argument about it being a problem of SC2 itself more than being a race problem. I don't like all this "oh my race is so much worse than yours at x" behaviour, even tho my posts kinda seem to "defend" Protoss, but that's not really the case I'm just trying to point out some things that might not be too obvious from a Zerg's perspective. And yet again, I do not disagree with you on the fact that Zerg's scouting should be slightly improved (maybe make overlords a liiiiiil faster for example), I'm just trying to say Protoss could need an improvement in this regard as well. Even Terrans, despite having the most options to scout have trouble doing so before a certain amount of time IMO.
Sorry, you come off as saying that my scout is guranteed to work and thus I can react. That is not the case, it is almost never the case. A scouting probe has a far greater chance of seeing if I am roach rushing/etc then my sacced overlord does of seeing your stargate.
No I agree, SC2 scouting sucks, but considering Zerg has the most options it needs to scout for in any of the matchups, and requires more responses, when the other two races can do relatively safe builds and pump a couple extra units faster, where as zerg will often have to throw down a new an entire new tech and hope they can get it in time.
My main point is, there is no relatively safe build for zerg. Where as for protoss, a 3 gate expand is extremely safe, and can be adapted depeding upon what is scouted.
|
On March 21 2011 19:59 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +
Apart from that I still feel that some minor changes should be made in order to help Zerg out a little bit. The problem is that Zerg has not room to make any small errors or they lose. The margin of error is smaller than in the other races.
yeah exactly! Thats exactly what I think too. ZvP isn't OP in a way because Zerg can react to everything Protoss does, but it's way harder to decide what to do and way more unforgiving to make mistakes. Just some examples: Protoss goes for VoidRays - Zerg goes for Hydras: as protoss u just add the VoidRay to your Army because its still a great damage dealer, and go into defensive mode Zerg goes for Spire - Protoss goes for 6gate: Zerg is dead Protoss goes for fast Collosus - Zerg goes for a heavy Roach attack: Protoss can hold Zerg goes for Roach - Protoss goes for VoidRay: Zerg loses
Uhh it's not that easy.
If Protoss goes VRs and Zerg responds with Hydras, Protoss cannot simply go into defensive mode. Look at the game that July won, he simply dropped the main and won easily.
|
On March 21 2011 19:59 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +
Apart from that I still feel that some minor changes should be made in order to help Zerg out a little bit. The problem is that Zerg has not room to make any small errors or they lose. The margin of error is smaller than in the other races.
yeah exactly! Thats exactly what I think too. ZvP isn't OP in a way because Zerg can react to everything Protoss does, but it's way harder to decide what to do and way more unforgiving to make mistakes. Just some examples: Protoss goes for VoidRays - Zerg goes for Hydras: as protoss u just add the VoidRay to your Army because its still a great damage dealer, and go into defensive mode Zerg goes for Spire - Protoss goes for 6gate: Zerg is dead Protoss goes for fast Collosus - Zerg goes for a heavy Roach attack: Protoss can hold Zerg goes for Roach - Protoss goes for VoidRay: Zerg loses I just think that 1-2minor changes like putting overlordspeed or/and burrow to hatch-tech would just make it so much easier for Zerg to react and you would have more units than speedling on hatch tech.
Yeahhhh right... You dont know...
If the protoss goes fast collosus and zerg ling-roach or ling bane or mass roach all in, if the zerg play right he can easily win. A hydra push will destroy any protoss player going stargate and if zerg goes roach and the protoss goes voidray he can defend with 3 queen until the protoss as more than 3 void.
|
On March 22 2011 05:50 randplaty wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2011 19:59 Big J wrote:
Apart from that I still feel that some minor changes should be made in order to help Zerg out a little bit. The problem is that Zerg has not room to make any small errors or they lose. The margin of error is smaller than in the other races.
yeah exactly! Thats exactly what I think too. ZvP isn't OP in a way because Zerg can react to everything Protoss does, but it's way harder to decide what to do and way more unforgiving to make mistakes. Just some examples: Protoss goes for VoidRays - Zerg goes for Hydras: as protoss u just add the VoidRay to your Army because its still a great damage dealer, and go into defensive mode Zerg goes for Spire - Protoss goes for 6gate: Zerg is dead Protoss goes for fast Collosus - Zerg goes for a heavy Roach attack: Protoss can hold Zerg goes for Roach - Protoss goes for VoidRay: Zerg loses Uhh it's not that easy. If Protoss goes VRs and Zerg responds with Hydras, Protoss cannot simply go into defensive mode. Look at the game that July won, he simply dropped the main and won easily.
the real complaint is that Zerg can't just spam mutabaneling and have to resort to units that move at a normal speed. The real complaint is thatyhey can't harrass with hydras and they can't aoe with roaches. The real complaint is that they have to use brute force vs Protoss and hence they don't feel all gosu with their micro and their banelng spreads.
The complaint is that they have to fight straight up.
|
On March 21 2011 15:53 Ribbon wrote:
Question: July went speedling expand every single game, but he never used it. Why didn't he try to kill MC's expo in game 1?
Because there's no alternative. Hatch first is wrecked by cannons unless Protoss scouts waaaay late; speedless expand is wrecked by early stalker pressure. It's the same reason Protoss almost always get a robo against Terran, even if they use it for observers and little else.
|
I like the OP's analysis of each game.
MC's strategies and mechanics were so flawless, and the wins were due to his perfect execution and a few crucial errors on July's part. The flashy FFs were just icing on the cake; they didn't auto-win any of his games.
|
I don't think the OP's goal was to disprove that forcefields are OP, just make a solid argument that July vs. MC doesn't give us any real evidence in the matter. July had some big mistakes in scouting/reactions, and I don't think anyone sane would try to claim that July played on MC's level during those games. Games where the clearly better player wins shouldn't be used in the debate of whether or not a certain unit/race is OP.
|
I have a real hard time with the critique that July made mistakes. He didn't have information he needed to do better, no doubt, but it's not possible to have perfect scouting information, especially as early-game zerg.
The biggest point is that MC used July's lack of knowledge to beat him like he stole something. The balance question really is: could July have stopped MC even with complete knowledge?
|
Just look at MC's games against Ciara. He won game 1 with a 3-gate and no sentries, even when Ciara scouted it and saw the pylon. The attack worked because Ciara did a terrible job of reacting to it by not microing his zerglings and not building a single spine crawler. If you do something solid and your opponent completely messes up, you're going to win regardless of your army composition. MC is just so good that he doesn't make any mistakes, meaning that even the tinniest mistake by an opponent can cost them the game.
|
On March 20 2011 18:17 ZeeMan wrote:
To me, it looks like you are starting with the conclusion, and then trying to justify it (In this case, the conclusion is, "There is no imbalance"). This is a poor way to conduct any analysis.
This. OP brings up some good points, but it's obvious that he decided it was not OP first, then started to find reasons for it.
In game 1, he states that Zergs have never seen a 4-gate followed by expo + cancel before, when in fact this has build has been used several times in the GSL already (probably 4-5+ times) and to great success.
He also overemphasizes the scouting mistakes by July when really it's nearly impossible to scout the Protoss's tech path before lair tech finishes. Sure you could sacrifice an overlord, but if the P spreads out his gates around his base there's no way to find all four before it goes down, so how is he supposed to know it's a 4-gate rather than a 3-gate sentry expand?
The rushing to hydras from July is probably also a response to the meta-game, where a phoenix/void ray opening is quite common in the matchup. We've seen plenty of times when the Protoss simply flies in with a few phoenix and pick off 3 queens + a bunch of overlords and ends up with a massive lead in the mid game simply because of how the BO's played out. Getting a hydra den AFTER the phoenix are in your base is too late.
|
July never sacked an overlord in to see what protoss' production was
Well, if I remember correctly, MC was at the bottom left position. And his 4 gates were around and between his minerals and his ramp (but left enough from the ramp not to be scouted by a ramp-ling). A sacrificial overlord would not have been able to scout the 4 gate build : it would have been killed before reaching the hidden position. Great building placement by MC, but I have no idea how July could have scouted it.
Sentries were not the main factor in winning this game, the sentries were just there to convince the 3 gate expand. Had July seen what MC was doing he could have easily won.
True (maybe not easily but possibly). Unfortunately I'm not sure if July could have seen what MC was doing. Given the sentry (and ofcourse the nexus) presence, it was obvious from July's POV that MC was going to expand. My opinion and current trend is that the zerg is forced *not* to drone like July did, for safety's sake. More queens and crawlers if defensive, otherwise more lings if offensive (or both if defensive as well). If you are playing semi-blind, you have to choose between taking risks or playing safe, and I suppose that July took the risk of making many drones (and payed for it).
For Zerg: The importance of scouting and tech timings based upon that scouting.
July tried to scout alot, but MC prevented the scouting by using intelligent building placement and scout interceptions. Maybe not scoutable at all in the "game 1 case". I clearly remember that July scouted more than once with a little pack of lings (and lost a few of them) to be certain that the nexus was not going to be cancelled (he tested the area 3 times in a row iirc). But it should now probably be scouted beyond construction to be 100% sure (which IMO costs alot of scouting lings and blind safety requirement until the nexus pops, if you play on maps where it is possible to make a perfect hidden building placement + watching for the incoming overlords)..
In my opinion, if you are a protoss player and want to improve your PvZ, you must study the positioning of your 3 or 4 gates (or stargate or whatever) for each map and start-position to know a "blind spot" like in G1. By doing so, you force the Z player to either play risky ( = the toss wins if he 4-gates) or to play safely ( = less drones). The key for this is to find a place where it is impossible for an overlord to float without being killed by a stalker or sentry - and to use patrols to see the incoming sac-overlord at all costs (which is not costly).
That place can then be used to put 3 gates or 4 gates or 3 gates+stargate or 3 gates+council or 3 gates+robo, all of which can be mixed in with a fake or real nexus expand. The key fact that it is possible on many maps to prevent the Z from scouting your early tech-tree entirely (which requires patrolling) is very important.
I think that it is technically possible to hide it on every single tournament-pooled map, but I'm not sure if it's humanly possible to make the correct patrolling perfectly and every game. Hmm unless maybe if you are a Korean with enough experience 
Note that my input to this discussion does not include the (rarer) cases of the proxies. Ofcourse a proxied stargate will not have the same effect as a stargate hidden in your base, just for the particular dynamics it creates by its exotic location and rush distance. Hm I'm tired.
|
On March 22 2011 06:01 lorkac wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2011 05:50 randplaty wrote:On March 21 2011 19:59 Big J wrote:
Apart from that I still feel that some minor changes should be made in order to help Zerg out a little bit. The problem is that Zerg has not room to make any small errors or they lose. The margin of error is smaller than in the other races.
yeah exactly! Thats exactly what I think too. ZvP isn't OP in a way because Zerg can react to everything Protoss does, but it's way harder to decide what to do and way more unforgiving to make mistakes. Just some examples: Protoss goes for VoidRays - Zerg goes for Hydras: as protoss u just add the VoidRay to your Army because its still a great damage dealer, and go into defensive mode Zerg goes for Spire - Protoss goes for 6gate: Zerg is dead Protoss goes for fast Collosus - Zerg goes for a heavy Roach attack: Protoss can hold Zerg goes for Roach - Protoss goes for VoidRay: Zerg loses Uhh it's not that easy. If Protoss goes VRs and Zerg responds with Hydras, Protoss cannot simply go into defensive mode. Look at the game that July won, he simply dropped the main and won easily. the real complaint is that Zerg can't just spam mutabaneling and have to resort to units that move at a normal speed. The real complaint is thatyhey can't harrass with hydras and they can't aoe with roaches. The real complaint is that they have to use brute force vs Protoss and hence they don't feel all gosu with their micro and their banelng spreads. The complaint is that they have to fight straight up.
So the complaint is that zerg isn't protoss or terran? What are you trying to say here?
|
To OP author,
I'm not sure that it's possible to state with high certainty that something is balanced or unbalanced from watching a small subset of games. It takes a lot of analysis to determine balance using a large sample of games instead of five. The rather glib criticisms of July's play seem like a pretty flimsy justification. For instance, you said that July should have scouted better in game 1, but how was July supposed to scout the placement of those 3 extra WGs? They were located in an extremely difficult location to scout: to the south of the nexus next to the wall in the corner. July's overlord would have either had to fly from the right over the natural or move over a large portion of main base before getting vision of that small corner area. The only way he could have done better would have been to see the nexus cancel, but that would have bought him and extra 10 seconds before the vision tower spotted the push. Would 10 seconds have improved July's chances? I have no answer to that.
I think oGsMC played phenomenally well and fully deserves the win having come up with fantastic builds that were executed perfectly.
|
On March 22 2011 07:00 MonsieurGrimm wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2011 06:01 lorkac wrote:On March 22 2011 05:50 randplaty wrote:On March 21 2011 19:59 Big J wrote:
Apart from that I still feel that some minor changes should be made in order to help Zerg out a little bit. The problem is that Zerg has not room to make any small errors or they lose. The margin of error is smaller than in the other races.
yeah exactly! Thats exactly what I think too. ZvP isn't OP in a way because Zerg can react to everything Protoss does, but it's way harder to decide what to do and way more unforgiving to make mistakes. Just some examples: Protoss goes for VoidRays - Zerg goes for Hydras: as protoss u just add the VoidRay to your Army because its still a great damage dealer, and go into defensive mode Zerg goes for Spire - Protoss goes for 6gate: Zerg is dead Protoss goes for fast Collosus - Zerg goes for a heavy Roach attack: Protoss can hold Zerg goes for Roach - Protoss goes for VoidRay: Zerg loses Uhh it's not that easy. If Protoss goes VRs and Zerg responds with Hydras, Protoss cannot simply go into defensive mode. Look at the game that July won, he simply dropped the main and won easily. the real complaint is that Zerg can't just spam mutabaneling and have to resort to units that move at a normal speed. The real complaint is thatyhey can't harrass with hydras and they can't aoe with roaches. The real complaint is that they have to use brute force vs Protoss and hence they don't feel all gosu with their micro and their banelng spreads. The complaint is that they have to fight straight up. So the complaint is that zerg isn't protoss or terran? What are you trying to say here?
Zerg loves using banelings and mutas and zerglings.
Vs toss, they have to use roaches and hydras--so they QQ.
They see July use banelings vs toss (anypro) and get excited.
He then dies to MC, so they QQ because their hope died with him.
Nothing in what I said is about protoss or Terran strats. Zerg have the cheapest aoe unit and the most manueverable/fast harass unit. Zerg gets map control the fastest and Zerg gets the best late game production.
Now they see toss being aggressive so they have to 2base, so they QQ.
Do I need to spell it out for you more?
|
After watching iNControl's stream + GSTL games today, I wonder why more Zergs aren't utilizing 2 early spine crawlers to cut down on the number of units they need to produce + hardcounter sentries (if they scout what appears to be a 3 gate expand).
After watching IMLosira play in GSTL today, his PvZ looks way more solid than JulyZerg. I think we just saw JulyZerg get outplayed more than we saw any evidence of balance issues with sentries.
|
On March 22 2011 08:07 lorkac wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2011 07:00 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On March 22 2011 06:01 lorkac wrote:On March 22 2011 05:50 randplaty wrote:On March 21 2011 19:59 Big J wrote:
Apart from that I still feel that some minor changes should be made in order to help Zerg out a little bit. The problem is that Zerg has not room to make any small errors or they lose. The margin of error is smaller than in the other races.
yeah exactly! Thats exactly what I think too. ZvP isn't OP in a way because Zerg can react to everything Protoss does, but it's way harder to decide what to do and way more unforgiving to make mistakes. Just some examples: Protoss goes for VoidRays - Zerg goes for Hydras: as protoss u just add the VoidRay to your Army because its still a great damage dealer, and go into defensive mode Zerg goes for Spire - Protoss goes for 6gate: Zerg is dead Protoss goes for fast Collosus - Zerg goes for a heavy Roach attack: Protoss can hold Zerg goes for Roach - Protoss goes for VoidRay: Zerg loses Uhh it's not that easy. If Protoss goes VRs and Zerg responds with Hydras, Protoss cannot simply go into defensive mode. Look at the game that July won, he simply dropped the main and won easily. the real complaint is that Zerg can't just spam mutabaneling and have to resort to units that move at a normal speed. The real complaint is thatyhey can't harrass with hydras and they can't aoe with roaches. The real complaint is that they have to use brute force vs Protoss and hence they don't feel all gosu with their micro and their banelng spreads. The complaint is that they have to fight straight up. So the complaint is that zerg isn't protoss or terran? What are you trying to say here? Zerg loves using banelings and mutas and zerglings. Vs toss, they have to use roaches and hydras--so they QQ. They see July use banelings vs toss (anypro) and get excited. He then dies to MC, so they QQ because their hope died with him. Nothing in what I said is about protoss or Terran strats. Zerg have the cheapest aoe unit and the most manueverable/fast harass unit. Zerg gets map control the fastest and Zerg gets the best late game production. Now they see toss being aggressive so they have to 2base, so they QQ. Do I need to spell it out for you more?
So your point is that zergs are crying... because a valid style of play... which saw no use in the finals... was somehow proved invalid because the player who used it previously lost in the finals... and that zergs are upset at protoss earlygame for the sole reason of they have to 2base, instead of having half their army nullified or having no viable way of scouting earlygame?
Did you even watch the finals? Have you ever played zerg against protoss or even protoss against zerg?
|
On March 22 2011 08:11 Snaphoo wrote:
After watching iNControl's stream + GSTL games today, I wonder why more Zergs aren't utilizing 2 early spine crawlers to cut down on the number of units they need to produce + hardcounter sentries (if they scout what appears to be a 3 gate expand).
After watching IMLosira play in GSTL today, his PvZ looks way more solid than JulyZerg. I think we just saw JulyZerg get outplayed more than we saw any evidence of balance issues with sentries.
Because if you place down spines and they don't attack, you're behind all those minerals for nothing?
Zerg's don't make that many units early unless they're under pressure - they can't, or they're behind.
|
Because if you place down spines and they don't attack, you're behind all those minerals for nothing?
Perhaps it's not as clear because I didn't include replays, but with regard to 2 spinecrawlers:
- If Protoss DOESN'T pressure/attack at all after your second base is up, you should be able to get far ahead by droning up and feeling very safe.
- If Protoss DOES pressure (as every competent 3 gate expand will do) then you can cheat by making many fewer lings/roaches in the early game, more than making up for the 200 minerals/2 drones that would have had to go into lings/roaches after Toss ("shark mode") brought a ball of sentries/stalkers near your creep and then walked off.
- If Protoss DOES ATTACK with 3gates or a surprise 4 gate, then you can create units, and a sentry-heavy composition will have far more difficult attacking near your ramp because of the spine crawlers. They tank damage, they have great range, and they can't be force-fielded. 2 spinecrawlers are far more fearsome than even 2 dozen lings in my experience as Toss, and for far fewer drones.
Finally: iNControl has lost games to this style, and IMLosira has used it to great success in PvZ-- this isn't gold-level theorycrafting, this is a strategy used in the GSL by a Code S Zerg to great effect.
|
On March 22 2011 08:28 Snaphoo wrote:Show nested quote +Because if you place down spines and they don't attack, you're behind all those minerals for nothing? Perhaps it's not as clear because I didn't include replays, but with regard to 2 spinecrawlers: - If Protoss DOESN'T pressure/attack at all after your second base is up, you should be able to get far ahead by droning up and feeling very safe. - If Protoss DOES pressure (as every 3 gate expand will do) then you can cheat by making many fewer lings/roaches in the early game, more than making up for the 200 minerals/2 drones that would have had to go into lings/roaches after Toss ("shark mode") brought a ball of sentries/stalkers near your creep and then walks off. - If Protoss DOES ATTACK with 3gates or a surprise 4 gate, then you can create units, and a sentry-heavy composition will have far more difficult attacking near your ramp because of the spine crawlers. They tank damage, they have great range, and they can't be force-fielded. 2 spinecrawlers are far more fearsome than even 2 dozen lings in my experience as Toss, and for far fewer drones.
Maybe we're thinking about different 3 gate expands :S most of the ones I see are almost all sentries, and they almost never pressure unless zerg tries to fast third.
|
Maybe we're thinking about different 3 gate expands :S most of the ones I see are almost all sentries, and they almost never pressure unless zerg tries to fast third.
Whoa, yes, then we're definitely thinking of different expansion styles; most 3 gates I see at least poke around with watchtowers and stuff with their mini-deathballs of sentry/stalker in the early game to feign pressure and force Z to create units.
But even assuming you're playing against a 3 gate sentry build that doesn't expand: you're so very safe! Don't you normally build a few extra lings during early game "just in case" P attacks? Instead of those 8 zerglings, get 2 spinecrawlers.
EDIT: Also, to be fair to JulyZerg, I think that Losira may have favored this style after seeing MC's heavy use of early sentries against Z and strategizing how to stop it with NesTea, so this may be a reaction to MC's play rather than simply a better way of dealing with it.
|
On March 22 2011 08:34 Snaphoo wrote:Show nested quote +Maybe we're thinking about different 3 gate expands :S most of the ones I see are almost all sentries, and they almost never pressure unless zerg tries to fast third. Whoa, yes, then we're definitely thinking of different expansion styles; most 3 gates I see at least poke around with watchtowers and stuff with their mini-deathballs of sentry/stalker in the early game to feign pressure and force Z to create units. But even assuming you're playing against a 3 gate sentry build that doesn't expand: you're so very safe! Don't you normally build a few extra lings during early game "just in case" P attacks? Instead of those 8 zerglings, get 2 spinecrawlers. EDIT: Also, to be fair to JulyZerg, I think that Losira may have favored this style after seeing MC's heavy use of early sentries against Z and strategizing how to stop it with NesTea, so this may be a reaction to MC's play rather than simply a better way of dealing with it.
Nah, I usually don't worry about toss pressure at all until I'm at least at lair and looking to get roaches with speed and burrow into thirds D: the reasoning is that if I mass a lot of roaches and zerglings, and he has sentry/stalker instead of almost all sentries, I think I can kill him, especially if he's halfway across the map (I could be wrong though..)
|
@MonsieurGrimm
yes, I have played Zerg against diamond level Protoss. Yes, I know it's hard. Yes, I wish Zerg could fast expand without needing static defenses just like either Protoss or Terran.
It's silly that when Protoss fast expands that they don't need to build cannons or make units to defend. It's silly that Protoss doesn't have to stop worker production when they 4gate or 6gate. Oh wait a minute, they do don't they?
When Protoss plays aggressive (4-6 gate) they stop worker production just like a Zerg player being aggressive.
When Protoss fast expands they have to build cannons and sentries just to not die. Just like Zerg.
It's silly that Zerg is the only race who complains that their opponent had units of any tier at any point in the game and are willing to call out imbalance!
Did you read the live report thread?
MC was called a cheeser for playing mind games, for expanding, for taking risks, for using teir 1 units, for using tier 2 units, for using tier 3 units, for attacking, for defending, etc...
It was not fair, supposedly, that a Zerg who teched hard and droned hard had no units. It wasn't fair that a player who is famous for making timing pushes did timing pushes. It's not fair that a player in the finals didn't prepare to face off against a playstyle his opponent is famous for.
What could julyzerg have done? He could have been more aggressive, less long term. Baneling busts and 2base play just as he had been doing the whole time before the finals. Would mc have gotten ahead Eco wise? Yes. And mc would also have not been able to make the timing pushes he did. When July gets map control and momentum, *then* he macros up. Just like he did every other time that he won.
The QQ was seeing July play standard and losing without admitting that standard doesn't work against Protoss timing pushes. The QQ was thinking that the reason MC won was purely Forcefields when it was apparent that MC more times than not had the bigger army. Why did MC have the bigger army? Becase when you spend your time droning
and teching at the same time the guy who builds shit just, as Day 9 said, goes and fucking kills him.
July got outplayed because he was out macroed and out microed. The games he won were the ones where he stayed 1-2 bases for a log time, where he focuse on aggression instead of passive droning, where he stayed low tech for a long time as he depended on map control and micro and aggression.
He did not lose because zerg's ability to scout is bad. Nor did July lose because gateway units are imba. July lost because he played bad, period.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On March 22 2011 09:59 lorkac wrote:
@MonsieurGrimm
yes, I have played Zerg against diamond level Protoss. Yes, I know it's hard. Yes, I wish Zerg could fast expand without needing static defenses just like either Protoss or Terran.
It's silly that when Protoss fast expands that they don't need to build cannons or make units to defend. It's silly that Protoss doesn't have to stop worker production when they 4gate or 6gate. Oh wait a minute, they do don't they?
When Protoss plays aggressive (4-6 gate) they stop worker production just like a Zerg player being aggressive.
When Protoss fast expands they have to build cannons and sentries just to not die. Just like Zerg.
It's silly that Zerg is the only race who complains that their opponent had units of any tier at any point in the game and are willing to call out imbalance!
Did you read the live report thread?
MC was called a cheeser for playing mind games, for expanding, for taking risks, for using teir 1 units, for using tier 2 units, for using tier 3 units, for attacking, for defending, etc...
It was not fair, supposedly, that a Zerg who teched hard and droned hard had no units. It wasn't fair that a player who is famous for making timing pushes did timing pushes. It's not fair that a player in the finals didn't prepare to face off against a playstyle his opponent is famous for.
What could julyzerg have done? He could have been more aggressive, less long term. Baneling busts and 2base play just as he had been doing the whole time before the finals. Would mc have gotten ahead Eco wise? Yes. And mc would also have not been able to make the timing pushes he did. When July gets map control and momentum, *then* he macros up. Just like he did every other time that he won.
The QQ was seeing July play standard and losing without admitting that standard doesn't work against Protoss timing pushes. The QQ was thinking that the reason MC won was purely Forcefields when it was apparent that MC more times than not had the bigger army. Why did MC have the bigger army? Becase when you spend your time droning
and teching at the same time the guy who builds shit just, as Day 9 said, goes and fucking kills him.
July got outplayed because he was out macroed and out microed. The games he won were the ones where he stayed 1-2 bases for a log time, where he focuse on aggression instead of passive droning, where he stayed low tech for a long time as he depended on map control and micro and aggression.
He did not lose because zerg's ability to scout is bad. Nor did July lose because gateway units are imba. July lost because he played bad, period.
I agree with everything you just said, except the part where you said july was teching and droning too hard - at least in the first game I don't think that was the case, and I do think that the forcefield on the ramp is broken but that's it.
|
On March 22 2011 06:49 niilzon wrote:Well, if I remember correctly, MC was at the bottom left position. And his 4 gates were around and between his minerals and his ramp (but left enough from the ramp not to be scouted by a ramp-ling). A sacrificial overlord would not have been able to scout the 4 gate build : it would have been killed before reaching the hidden position. Great building placement by MC, but I have no idea how July could have scouted it. Show nested quote +Sentries were not the main factor in winning this game, the sentries were just there to convince the 3 gate expand. Had July seen what MC was doing he could have easily won. True (maybe not easily but possibly). Unfortunately I'm not sure if July could have seen what MC was doing. Given the sentry (and ofcourse the nexus) presence, it was obvious from July's POV that MC was going to expand. My opinion and current trend is that the zerg is forced *not* to drone like July did, for safety's sake. More queens and crawlers if defensive, otherwise more lings if offensive (or both if defensive as well). If you are playing semi-blind, you have to choose between taking risks or playing safe, and I suppose that July took the risk of making many drones (and payed for it). Show nested quote +For Zerg: The importance of scouting and tech timings based upon that scouting. July tried to scout alot, but MC prevented the scouting by using intelligent building placement and scout interceptions. Maybe not scoutable at all in the "game 1 case". I clearly remember that July scouted more than once with a little pack of lings (and lost a few of them) to be certain that the nexus was not going to be cancelled (he tested the area 3 times in a row iirc). But it should now probably be scouted beyond construction to be 100% sure (which IMO costs alot of scouting lings and blind safety requirement until the nexus pops, if you play on maps where it is possible to make a perfect hidden building placement + watching for the incoming overlords).. In my opinion, if you are a protoss player and want to improve your PvZ, you must study the positioning of your 3 or 4 gates (or stargate or whatever) for each map and start-position to know a "blind spot" like in G1. By doing so, you force the Z player to either play risky ( = the toss wins if he 4-gates) or to play safely ( = less drones). The key for this is to find a place where it is impossible for an overlord to float without being killed by a stalker or sentry - and to use patrols to see the incoming sac-overlord at all costs (which is not costly). That place can then be used to put 3 gates or 4 gates or 3 gates+stargate or 3 gates+council or 3 gates+robo, all of which can be mixed in with a fake or real nexus expand. The key fact that it is possible on many maps to prevent the Z from scouting your early tech-tree entirely (which requires patrolling) is very important. I think that it is technically possible to hide it on every single tournament-pooled map, but I'm not sure if it's humanly possible to make the correct patrolling perfectly and every game. Hmm unless maybe if you are a Korean with enough experience Note that my input to this discussion does not include the (rarer) cases of the proxies. Ofcourse a proxied stargate will not have the same effect as a stargate hidden in your base, just for the particular dynamics it creates by its exotic location and rush distance. Hm I'm tired.
This is a very good post. I'm very happy to see that the balance complaints have moved away from sentry imba and ore towards how zerg should be scouting, as this was the primary goal of my post thank you all for your feedback. Hopefully I'll have an analysis of gstl spoiler + Show Spoiler + up tomorrow, and balance talk will not be an issue
|
On March 22 2011 11:56 MonsieurGrimm wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On March 22 2011 09:59 lorkac wrote:
@MonsieurGrimm
yes, I have played Zerg against diamond level Protoss. Yes, I know it's hard. Yes, I wish Zerg could fast expand without needing static defenses just like either Protoss or Terran.
It's silly that when Protoss fast expands that they don't need to build cannons or make units to defend. It's silly that Protoss doesn't have to stop worker production when they 4gate or 6gate. Oh wait a minute, they do don't they?
When Protoss plays aggressive (4-6 gate) they stop worker production just like a Zerg player being aggressive.
When Protoss fast expands they have to build cannons and sentries just to not die. Just like Zerg.
It's silly that Zerg is the only race who complains that their opponent had units of any tier at any point in the game and are willing to call out imbalance!
Did you read the live report thread?
MC was called a cheeser for playing mind games, for expanding, for taking risks, for using teir 1 units, for using tier 2 units, for using tier 3 units, for attacking, for defending, etc...
It was not fair, supposedly, that a Zerg who teched hard and droned hard had no units. It wasn't fair that a player who is famous for making timing pushes did timing pushes. It's not fair that a player in the finals didn't prepare to face off against a playstyle his opponent is famous for.
What could julyzerg have done? He could have been more aggressive, less long term. Baneling busts and 2base play just as he had been doing the whole time before the finals. Would mc have gotten ahead Eco wise? Yes. And mc would also have not been able to make the timing pushes he did. When July gets map control and momentum, *then* he macros up. Just like he did every other time that he won.
The QQ was seeing July play standard and losing without admitting that standard doesn't work against Protoss timing pushes. The QQ was thinking that the reason MC won was purely Forcefields when it was apparent that MC more times than not had the bigger army. Why did MC have the bigger army? Becase when you spend your time droning
and teching at the same time the guy who builds shit just, as Day 9 said, goes and fucking kills him.
July got outplayed because he was out macroed and out microed. The games he won were the ones where he stayed 1-2 bases for a log time, where he focuse on aggression instead of passive droning, where he stayed low tech for a long time as he depended on map control and micro and aggression.
He did not lose because zerg's ability to scout is bad. Nor did July lose because gateway units are imba. July lost because he played bad, period. I agree with everything you just said, except the part where you said july was teching and droning too hard - at least in the first game I don't think that was the case, and I do think that the forcefield on the ramp is broken but that's it.
I agree with your last two comments as well.
|
thanks for the analysis and opening up of the issue for discussion. in my opinion the sentries were a bigger part to mc's win than what you potray them as here. without that many ffs july would had a bigger and better army that can properly engage, and so i felt that the fight would have definitely looked more even. its also sad to read how july mainly lost due to scouting. a 'd' button pressed at the wrong time on july's keyboard easily costed him the game against the very well planned timing pushes from mc. that is actually pretty sad fact for all the zerg players out there ]:
anyhow, i feel that a 4gate isn't that easily defended against even if it is scouted. im probably bad but i lose alot to 4gates even though i scout his front, cut drones at around 22 and start preparing for it
|
What could julyzerg have done? He could have been more aggressive, less long term. Baneling busts and 2base play just as he had been doing the whole time before the finals. Would mc have gotten ahead Eco wise? Yes. And mc would also have not been able to make the timing pushes he did.
baneling busts and so on work very well against someone that is making too little defenses.
Baneling busts against someone with 7 sentries will simply not work.
The QQ was seeing July play standard and losing without admitting that standard doesn't work against Protoss timing pushes.
So there is no standard way to survive as zerg, but thats fine? -_-
Why did MC have the bigger army? Becase when you spend your time droning
and teching at the same time the guy who builds shit just, as Day 9 said, goes and fucking kills him.
Aye, if you drone, and he is 4gating and pushes, you die.
And if you make units, and he is 3gating and expands, you are super far behind, and you die.
The problem isnt that if you drone, you risk dying to a 4gate.
The problem is that against a well executed 4gate such as the one displayed by MC in game 1, you have absolutely no way of telling if you should be droning or teching or making units, appart from just guessing. And if you guess wrong, you lose.
|
What's needed is some analysis of opening gas/pool vs 14 hatch. With the economic opening, you should always have more stuff unless you get messed with early, such as proxy gate, cannon rush, and four warp gate (1 gas). I'm sure MC would respond brilliantly in most cases, having other builds or timings prepared, but overall I think July's chances would have been better. To those bashing the wastefulness of spine crawlers, that is one of the things you can afford opening 14 hatch more than opening gas/pool.
Additionally, July got the best possible positions on every map he lost. That long distance makes 14 hatch that much more safe.
|
14hatch doesnmt make it any easier to survive a 4gate that you dont know is coming.
either you know its coming, or you dont. if you do, its due to a mistake on the toss side.
If you dont, you can either take a guess, and hope you are correct, or you can try to prepare for everything, and die no matter what he does, because no matter what he does, if you tried to prepare for everything, you end up not having the perfect response needed to survive a well designed blind toss push/all-in.
|
Show nested quote +What could julyzerg have done? He could have been more aggressive, less long term. Baneling busts and 2base play just as he had been doing the whole time before the finals. Would mc have gotten ahead Eco wise? Yes. And mc would also have not been able to make the timing pushes he did. baneling busts and so on work very well against someone that is making too little defenses. Baneling busts against someone with 7 sentries will simply not work.
Yeah, busting Protoss never works. Make sure you tell Huk and Anypro that. Also, tell Nestea and TheWind that their macro games are what's needed to beat Macro-centered Protoss. Please do.
Also, tell Julyzerg that his constant baneling/roach aggression doesn't ever work and that he should stick to Hydra/Muta tech. You know, "standard" play.
Show nested quote +The QQ was seeing July play standard and losing without admitting that standard doesn't work against Protoss timing pushes. So there is no standard way to survive as zerg, but thats fine? -_-
Yeah. It's like, you can't just hatch at 14 every match while the other two races have to have different builds depending on enemy race, distance, map size as well as what the opponent's build is.
Can you imagine playing zerg and having to have different builds depending on what you scout instead of simply building a hatchery at 14 and whining when it doesn't work? Wow, yeah, silly of me to think that build orders should be more dynamic--what was I thinking.
Show nested quote +
Why did MC have the bigger army? Becase when you spend your time droning
and teching at the same time the guy who builds shit just, as Day 9 said, goes and fucking kills him.
Aye, if you drone, and he is 4gating and pushes, you die. And if you make units, and he is 3gating and expands, you are super far behind, and you die. The problem isnt that if you drone, you risk dying to a 4gate. The problem is that against a well executed 4gate such as the one displayed by MC in game 1, you have absolutely no way of telling if you should be droning or teching or making units, appart from just guessing. And if you guess wrong, you lose.
So you had a player who exploited the metagame and won the GSL championship?
A player who knew that if zerg scouted Sentries that that must mean a FE build so the zerg player purposefully didn't build a lot of guys?
It's like that protoss player prepared for a finals match or something. Making sure to try new builds that *look* normal, but really isn't. It's like, the losing player lost because he kept wanting his opponent to simply follow the structure of the metagame.
"He has sentries! I have to macro or I die! I don't care that he's famous for timing pushes! I don't even care that he's timing pushed me 3 out of the last 3 games! I will macro! rawr!"
If you get stuck playing out the metagame you will always lose to the people who is looking ahead of the metagame. This goes for all games, period.
Here's the truth. Losira is winning thanks to aggression into heavy droning. July has been winning due to aggression into heavy droning. Why? Because that's what the metagame is allowing to happen because everyone else got too comfortable with passive zerg play.
|
Yeah. It's like, you can't just hatch at 14 every match while the other two races have to have different builds depending on enemy race, distance, map size as well as what the opponent's build is.
Can you imagine playing zerg and having to have different builds depending on what you scout instead of simply building a hatchery at 14 and whining when it doesn't work? Wow, yeah, silly of me to think that build orders should be more dynamic--what was I thinking.
Oh... I would love to. Sadly zerg mechanics deny this.
Any expansion later than 21 is an all-in
I would love to not haveing always 1 - 2 bases more and i realy would like to keep up on one base with a 2 base toss =)
|
On March 22 2011 17:08 Charon1979 wrote:Show nested quote +
Yeah. It's like, you can't just hatch at 14 every match while the other two races have to have different builds depending on enemy race, distance, map size as well as what the opponent's build is.
Can you imagine playing zerg and having to have different builds depending on what you scout instead of simply building a hatchery at 14 and whining when it doesn't work? Wow, yeah, silly of me to think that build orders should be more dynamic--what was I thinking.
Oh... I would love to. Sadly zerg mechanics deny this. Any expansion later than 21 is an all-in I would love to not haveing always 1 - 2 bases more and i realy would like to keep up on one base with a 2 base toss =)
Yeah, it's too bad you can't
11Pool18Hatch
13Gas13Pool
14Gas14Pool
14Hatch15Pool
14Hatch
14Pool
10Pool
etc...
It's too bad you can't all in like Terran or Toss with builds like
1Base Roach
1Base Baneling Bust
3HatchZergling
It's too bad you don't have as many options at your disposal as Protoss and Terran, it really is. I mean, not even counting new possible builds you only have 9 not counting 3RR, 6Pool, 7Pool, 7RR, 5RR, 1BaseMuta, EarlyHydraDrop, NydusRush, etc....
So few options for zerg... and that's only counting the stuff people use on ladder!
|
On March 22 2011 16:31 morimacil wrote:
14hatch doesnmt make it any easier to survive a 4gate that you dont know is coming.
either you know its coming, or you dont. if you do, its due to a mistake on the toss side.
If you dont, you can either take a guess, and hope you are correct, or you can try to prepare for everything, and die no matter what he does, because no matter what he does, if you tried to prepare for everything, you end up not having the perfect response needed to survive a well designed blind toss push/all-in.
Steal Protoss Gas. On the ladder (up to low masters) no protoss knows any other 1gas strategy than 4gate.
--> Always steal the gas, always be prepared for 4gate, always win. (THEY ARE REALLY THAT BAD!)
|
11Pool18Hatch
13Gas13Pool
14Gas14Pool
14Hatch15Pool
14Hatch
14Pool
10Pool
oh i see the HUGE difference in gameplay =)
Maybe you should ad that Z can extractor trick, 9 Ovi or 10 Ovi... again a HUGE difference!
It's too bad you can't all in like Terran or Toss with builds like
1Base Roach
1Base Baneling Bust
3HatchZergling
sure you CAN go all-in... but not nearly as effective... and there we are again on the scouting topic.. its sooooo hard to spot an early roach warren/banelingnest... it could be anywhere on the map... oh wait
|
On March 22 2011 17:15 lorkac wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2011 17:08 Charon1979 wrote:
Yeah. It's like, you can't just hatch at 14 every match while the other two races have to have different builds depending on enemy race, distance, map size as well as what the opponent's build is.
Can you imagine playing zerg and having to have different builds depending on what you scout instead of simply building a hatchery at 14 and whining when it doesn't work? Wow, yeah, silly of me to think that build orders should be more dynamic--what was I thinking.
Oh... I would love to. Sadly zerg mechanics deny this. Any expansion later than 21 is an all-in I would love to not haveing always 1 - 2 bases more and i realy would like to keep up on one base with a 2 base toss =) It's too bad you don't have as many options at your disposal as Protoss and Terran, it really is. I mean, not even counting new possible builds you only have 9 not counting 3RR, 6Pool, 7Pool, 7RR, 5RR, 1BaseMuta, EarlyHydraDrop, NydusRush, etc.... So few options for zerg... and that's only counting the stuff people use on ladder!
just fyi no one can actually lose to most of those builds - even if its unscouted untill its on ur ramp you should hold alot of those np and shouldnt really be used by any zerg - things like 1base muta are a joke and early hydra drop never works unless its a response to a specific style ala wat july did. no, zergs do not have as many options as t or p
|
Yeah, busting Protoss never works. Make sure you tell Huk and Anypro that. Also, tell Nestea and TheWind that their macro games are what's needed to beat Macro-centered Protoss. Please do.
Also, tell Julyzerg that his constant baneling/roach aggression doesn't ever work and that he should stick to Hydra/Muta tech. You know, "standard" play.
I didnt say that it never works.
Early agression can be incredibly awesome against a protoss that is doing a greedy build, or just doesnt have enough defenses.
It will just never work against someone who has 7 sentries waiting for you.
Yeah. It's like, you can't just hatch at 14 every match while the other two races have to have different builds depending on enemy race, distance, map size as well as what the opponent's build is..
July did do a lot of other things than just 14hatching.
The other builds still dont help you get better scouting information, and still arent safer against something that you cant possibly know is coming.
Can you imagine playing zerg and having to have different builds depending on what you scout instead of simply building a hatchery at 14 and whining when it doesn't work? Wow, yeah, silly of me to think that build orders should be more dynamic--what was I thinking.
Zerg does try and do different builds depending on what is scouted. Problem is, we can only scout something if the toss lets us.
Toss however, can do a build without needing to scout, and have it be very successful. Like that game 1 between MC and july, that wasnt the toss being clever about his scouting and adapting his build based on what the zerg did, that was MC doing a blind allin that zerg had no way of scouting.
It's too bad you can't all in like Terran or Toss with builds like
1Base Roach
1Base Baneling Bust
3HatchZergling
It's too bad you don't have as many options at your disposal as Protoss and Terran, it really is. I mean, not even counting new possible builds you only have 9 not counting 3RR, 6Pool, 7Pool, 7RR, 5RR, 1BaseMuta, EarlyHydraDrop, NydusRush, etc....
3 hatch ling against 7 sentries?
Baneling bust against 7 sentries?
roaches?
Sure enough, you can 6 or 7 pool cross map on metalopolis. But its incredibly easy for a toss to scout it, and stop it.
You can do all-ins as zerg against someone who tries to cut corners, and is too greedy. Against an opening that involves getting 4 gates, and 7 sentries, trying to do an all-in is pure suicide.
And seriously, most of the all-ins you mention in there are absolutely terrible.
Nydus rush? And hope that he doesnt scout his base?
1 base muta? And hope that he has no forge, and no stalkers/sentries? -_-
3hatch ling allin? Where do you get these dude, in silver league?
|
On March 22 2011 17:23 imbs wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2011 17:15 lorkac wrote:On March 22 2011 17:08 Charon1979 wrote:
Yeah. It's like, you can't just hatch at 14 every match while the other two races have to have different builds depending on enemy race, distance, map size as well as what the opponent's build is.
Can you imagine playing zerg and having to have different builds depending on what you scout instead of simply building a hatchery at 14 and whining when it doesn't work? Wow, yeah, silly of me to think that build orders should be more dynamic--what was I thinking.
Oh... I would love to. Sadly zerg mechanics deny this. Any expansion later than 21 is an all-in I would love to not haveing always 1 - 2 bases more and i realy would like to keep up on one base with a 2 base toss =) It's too bad you don't have as many options at your disposal as Protoss and Terran, it really is. I mean, not even counting new possible builds you only have 9 not counting 3RR, 6Pool, 7Pool, 7RR, 5RR, 1BaseMuta, EarlyHydraDrop, NydusRush, etc.... So few options for zerg... and that's only counting the stuff people use on ladder! just fyi no one can actually lose to most of those builds - even if its unscouted untill its on ur ramp you should hold alot of those np and shouldnt really be used by any zerg - things like 1base muta are a joke and early hydra drop never works unless its a response to a specific style ala wat july did. no, zergs do not have as many options as t or p
Too bad for Genius when he got Nydus rushed
Too bad TheWind didn't know that 1base roach sucks when he used it to win a game in the gsl
too made Hydra Drop was the only time July has ever beaten MC.
Too bad 6pool was something July and Fruitdealer both got to the finals of a GSL.
No one told Losira that heavy roach builds were bad when he used it to beat Huk.
You know what, just tell pro-zergs that are winning that they suck. It saves the TL forums the trouble.
Or we could just theorycraft if you want?
@Charon1979
All-ins are present in all three races. Zerg players just need to learn to use them more often, or at least as often as Protoss and Terran do. The different build produce different gas timings, different inject timings and more importantly they throw off the opponent's scout timings. Even if 2-3 of the builds produce relatively similar results, they all look different from each other when scouted. Why is it easier to scout zerg? Because since Zerg BO's keeps remaining standard, all the timings keep remaining the same.
For example, the reason for the popularity of the 11Pool18Hatch build is because it looks both like a 10Pool all in while having the econ possibility of a 14hatch15pool. In the thread where that build was figured out people kept arguing over mineral and larva efficiency when the best part of the build was that it doesn't look like a 14hatch.
You want to know why 2Rax is annoying? Because it could either be a bad all in or a bad FE. You want to know why MC's sentry pushes seemed so strong? Because it looks like a 3gate FE when it's actually a timing push.
It's not always about efficiency but it's also about looking or not looking the part.
|
Zerg players just need to learn to use them more often, or at least as often as Protoss and Terran do
and you promise you wont cancel my all-in with a FF? Or stop producing AA when my 3 mutas arrive?
|
In short, your arguments are:
- zerg all-ins were used on specific maps or in specific situations against specific builds
- Therefore its fine that toss can do unscoutable 4gates because zerg should be 6 pooling
|
On March 22 2011 17:36 morimacil wrote:Show nested quote +Yeah, busting Protoss never works. Make sure you tell Huk and Anypro that. Also, tell Nestea and TheWind that their macro games are what's needed to beat Macro-centered Protoss. Please do.
Also, tell Julyzerg that his constant baneling/roach aggression doesn't ever work and that he should stick to Hydra/Muta tech. You know, "standard" play. I didnt say that it never works. Early agression can be incredibly awesome against a protoss that is doing a greedy build, or just doesnt have enough defenses. It will just never work against someone who has 7 sentries waiting for you. Show nested quote +
Yeah. It's like, you can't just hatch at 14 every match while the other two races have to have different builds depending on enemy race, distance, map size as well as what the opponent's build is..
July did do a lot of other things than just 14hatching. The other builds still dont help you get better scouting information, and still arent safer against something that you cant possibly know is coming. Show nested quote +
Can you imagine playing zerg and having to have different builds depending on what you scout instead of simply building a hatchery at 14 and whining when it doesn't work? Wow, yeah, silly of me to think that build orders should be more dynamic--what was I thinking.
Zerg does try and do different builds depending on what is scouted. Problem is, we can only scout something if the toss lets us. Toss however, can do a build without needing to scout, and have it be very successful. Like that game 1 between MC and july, that wasnt the toss being clever about his scouting and adapting his build based on what the zerg did, that was MC doing a blind allin that zerg had no way of scouting. Show nested quote +It's too bad you can't all in like Terran or Toss with builds like
1Base Roach
1Base Baneling Bust
3HatchZergling
It's too bad you don't have as many options at your disposal as Protoss and Terran, it really is. I mean, not even counting new possible builds you only have 9 not counting 3RR, 6Pool, 7Pool, 7RR, 5RR, 1BaseMuta, EarlyHydraDrop, NydusRush, etc.... 3 hatch ling against 7 sentries? Baneling bust against 7 sentries? roaches? Sure enough, you can 6 or 7 pool cross map on metalopolis. But its incredibly easy for a toss to scout it, and stop it. You can do all-ins as zerg against someone who tries to cut corners, and is too greedy. Against an opening that involves getting 4 gates, and 7 sentries, trying to do an all-in is pure suicide. And seriously, most of the all-ins you mention in there are absolutely terrible. Nydus rush? And hope that he doesnt scout his base? 1 base muta? And hope that he has no forge, and no stalkers/sentries? -_- 3hatch ling allin? Where do you get these dude, in silver league?
No early pressure allows sentries to build up energy. Wasting a few zerglings or poking with roaches (even if it means losing some) to bait early forcefields prevents energy build up. Without the build up the protoss player can't do anything fancy with his push. If he has 7 sentries early then just 2-4 roaches are enough to pressure. How fast do you think 7 sentries takes to kill 3 roaches? (not quickly)
The all ins I'm suggesting have all worked before against different races and different maps. Do they all work against protoss? Of course not. But they are options. If Zerg *never* Nydus rushes, protoss eventually stop scouting their base. If zerg *never* 6pool, terran stops walling their base. If zerg *never* one base roaches, 7 sentries build up energy and cause the TL forums to QQ about imba forcefields.
So yeah, I'm saying zerg have to do these all in timing attacks.
|
On March 22 2011 17:47 morimacil wrote:In short, your arguments are: - zerg all-ins were used on specific maps or in specific situations against specific builds - Therefore its fine that toss can do 4gates because zerg should be 6 pooling
I would say that 4 minerals and about 300 gas was spent by MC to prevent his 4gate from being scouted. I would say seeing a FE should have forced July to get aggressive with roaches (like Losira) and attack early without droning up so much.
July's all ins got him to the GSL finals. Only 50+ drones across 5-6 bases vs nada, no queens against MVP, 6pools against Anypro, hydra drop against MC. Those won him games.
4gates are easy to spot 90% of the time. And if zerg leaned towards aggressive responses to FE's they won't be tricked because the early sentries can't actually kill off an early push without cannons supporting them. Cannons are forced, 4gate stopped. Or you gas steal to force a 4gate. Or you send in 3-4 drones (set to mine minerals) to run through the wall off and scout the base after/before saccing an overlord. (Alicia was sacrificing a zealot to tank for a probe that would also die just to scout terran, no reason zerg can't do the same)
It seems the only problem zerg really have is pride. They want to feel that their penis is bigger and get all Idra on the TL forums. Stop being lazy, try harder. And no, "my opponent out thinking me is OP" is not a valid excuse.
|
On March 22 2011 17:46 Charon1979 wrote:Show nested quote +Zerg players just need to learn to use them more often, or at least as often as Protoss and Terran do and you promise you wont cancel my all-in with a FF? Or stop producing AA when my 3 mutas arrive?
Bait forcfields (like terrans have to do)
Run mutas away (like good harassment is supposed to do)
Do you ever hear Protoss whine that terran build marines and turrets when they go phoenix? Do you think the existence of queens and spores prevent people for attacking with 1-2 voidrays? Do you think banshee/dt players whine about how op spore crawlers are?
Please, l2play and stop letting your a-move-habit get revealed in public.
|
Was anyone else watching the games and, even before any FFs had been placed, just looked at the relative armies heading out and thought "yep, July's pretty much dead here?".
I believe the OP's analysis is correct - superb FF's weren't what won MC the match, they were just the method of delivery. They did totally lock out July from doing anything sneaky, but he was *already* disadvantaged on unit number and/or composition and/or unused tech, due to being mindgamed. It was lack of scouting that lost July the match.
I think most players will agree giving the zerg some help in scouting around the 4-6 min mark is not unwarranted - suicide overlords too often come down to "do I get a lucky angle and see what I need to?". Also this would hopefully be a less severe change than playing with forcefields, around which the entire Protoss army rests on a knife edge.
|
On March 20 2011 16:17 MrBitter wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 16:13 Active.815 wrote: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? He's saying its not imba, and while they secured MC's victory they wouldnt've been necessary for him to win because of july's mistakes 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.
hmm thats a really subjective statement, you have no idea how much those forcefields actually did and while they helped had july not made mistakes and rushed to burrow he would have been fine anyways, there are so many factors that contributed to july's loss forcefields being OP was not one of those factors.
|
On March 22 2011 18:16 Paradice wrote:
Was anyone else watching the games and, even before any FFs had been placed, just looked at the relative armies heading out and thought "yep, July's pretty much dead here?".
I believe the OP's analysis is correct - superb FF's weren't what won MC the match, they were just the method of delivery. They did totally lock out July from doing anything sneaky, but he was *already* disadvantaged on unit number and/or composition and/or unused tech, due to being mindgamed. It was lack of scouting that lost July the match.
Think of it this way. If MC brought less Sentries means that he would have had 1 less gas which means more minerals which equals even more sentries/stalkers which means the natural would have died in seconds instead of being tickled by sentries for 30 seconds to a minute.
|
On March 22 2011 18:24 cheesemaster wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 16:17 MrBitter wrote:On March 20 2011 16:13 Active.815 wrote: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? He's saying its not imba, and while they secured MC's victory they wouldnt've been necessary for him to win because of july's mistakes 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. hmm thats a really subjective statement, you have no idea how much those forcefields actually did and while they helped had july not made mistakes and rushed to burrow he would have been fine anyways, there are so many factors that contributed to july's loss forcefields being OP was not one of those factors.
Let's assume that forcefields *were* OP.
The forcefields were still not what allowed MC to win.
|
MC's superior strategies and July's inability to respond properly were what decided the games, not 'OP' forcefields.
|
MC definitely outplayed July. However, I still think there were some things that made it harder for July:
-against a good player like MC, overlord scouting is much less effective
-good FF usage like MC further enhances the toss's ability to throw off zerg.
-Forge FE puts the zerg in a tricky position. If they open speedling and don't pressure, they will have a really hard time getting the economic advantage they need in the mid to late game.
|
|
|
On March 22 2011 18:12 lorkac wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2011 17:47 morimacil wrote:In short, your arguments are: - zerg all-ins were used on specific maps or in specific situations against specific builds - Therefore its fine that toss can do unscoutable 4gates because zerg should be 6 pooling I would say that 4 minerals and about 300 gas was spent by MC to prevent his 4gate from being scouted. I would say seeing a FE should have forced July to get aggressive with roaches (like Losira) and attack early without droning up so much. July's all ins got him to the GSL finals. Only 50+ drones across 5-6 bases vs nada, no queens against MVP, 6pools against Anypro, hydra drop against MC. Those won him games. 4gates are easy to spot 90% of the time. And if zerg leaned towards aggressive responses to FE's they won't be tricked because the early sentries can't actually kill off an early push without cannons supporting them. Cannons are forced, 4gate stopped. Or you gas steal to force a 4gate. Or you send in 3-4 drones (set to mine minerals) to run through the wall off and scout the base after/before saccing an overlord. (Alicia was sacrificing a zealot to tank for a probe that would also die just to scout terran, no reason zerg can't do the same) It seems the only problem zerg really have is pride. They want to feel that their penis is bigger and get all Idra on the TL forums. Stop being lazy, try harder. And no, "my opponent out thinking me is OP" is not a valid excuse.
pride?
We would like to be able to defend a rush or an all-in.
most players (not just zergs) would like to have a game where you can do a safe build, and not die to an all-in in the first few minutes of the game.
Most players do NOT want a game where the only possible response to an all-in is to do an earlier all-in yourself.
It has nothing to do with pride, penis size, or whatever you want to call it.
A game in which the only response to an all-in is to do an earlier all-in yourself is simply not what the majority wants.
|
On March 22 2011 05:50 randplaty wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2011 19:59 Big J wrote:
Apart from that I still feel that some minor changes should be made in order to help Zerg out a little bit. The problem is that Zerg has not room to make any small errors or they lose. The margin of error is smaller than in the other races.
yeah exactly! Thats exactly what I think too. ZvP isn't OP in a way because Zerg can react to everything Protoss does, but it's way harder to decide what to do and way more unforgiving to make mistakes. Just some examples: Protoss goes for VoidRays - Zerg goes for Hydras: as protoss u just add the VoidRay to your Army because its still a great damage dealer, and go into defensive mode Zerg goes for Spire - Protoss goes for 6gate: Zerg is dead Protoss goes for fast Collosus - Zerg goes for a heavy Roach attack: Protoss can hold Zerg goes for Roach - Protoss goes for VoidRay: Zerg loses Uhh it's not that easy. If Protoss goes VRs and Zerg responds with Hydras, Protoss cannot simply go into defensive mode. Look at the game that July won, he simply dropped the main and won easily.
July's timing attack probably would have lost had MC built more gateway units rather than more cannons at his natural. It isn't SUPER SUPER easy for protoss to scout for nydus worms, defend hydra drops, and so on, but it really isn't that hard.
|
On March 22 2011 18:40 lorkac wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2011 18:24 cheesemaster wrote:On March 20 2011 16:17 MrBitter wrote:On March 20 2011 16:13 Active.815 wrote: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? He's saying its not imba, and while they secured MC's victory they wouldnt've been necessary for him to win because of july's mistakes 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. hmm thats a really subjective statement, you have no idea how much those forcefields actually did and while they helped had july not made mistakes and rushed to burrow he would have been fine anyways, there are so many factors that contributed to july's loss forcefields being OP was not one of those factors. Let's assume that forcefields *were* OP. The forcefields were still not what allowed MC to win.
agreed, but honestly forcefields are the backbone of the protoss early game army there isnt much they could change that wouldnt seriously hurt protoss , maybe duration but thats about it. Forcefields are not op , mc forcefields well maybe lol
|
the only change to forcefields is to have remove it from the game and rebalance whole protoss army.
FF in this state of Protoss will always be needed to survive. period
This on the other side will ever mean that offensiv ramp FF will be possible.
and the sentry count doesn't mean anything or energy or what ever.
1 full sentry can block for nearly 1 minute. So increasing FF energy doesn't mean shiti if you have 1-2 sentrys.
If a Zerg is stupid enough to leave units in side is base, or is to gready to even build units instead to be alittle aggressiv and keep them in the open for flanks, he deserves to lose in this state of the game.
the whole reason this works is only because Zerg is greedy and not build enough units.
Sure max economy is a good goal, but if it in turn loses you the game what the point?
even a handful of Zerglings + Spines are a pretty good defense against any 4 gate and also can threaten and harass any Sentry expand.
And there were Signs of an unusual Expand
- low unit count during expand ( there should have been atleast 4-5 Sentrys(+others) but he had like 3-4 units in total)
- no forge but nexus first also a huge indicator, you can't hold a nexus with so few units against aggressiv speedlings.
|
I just dont understand how so many zergs went bat shit crazy about forcefields after the finals, when we didnt hear hardly any complaints about it before, 1 finals where the loser made tons of mistakes and the winner played immaculate games for the most part none the less. Its like zergs watched the finals expecting July to win and when he didnt they wanted to blame it on something besides a difference in skill hence the "well that proves it forcefields are OP" by so many zergs after the finals. I understand complaints about the protoss deathball and am sympathetic to zerg in that regard, but forcefields are a unique ability that makes the protoss race what it is, its bad enough theyve made HT's pretty much useless in PVT(i still think they will be viable in pvz) but thats another story.
|
On March 22 2011 20:02 freetgy wrote:
the only change to forcefields is to have remove it from the game and rebalance whole protoss army.
FF in this state of Protoss will always be needed to survive. period
This on the other side will ever mean that offensiv ramp FF will be possible.
and the sentry count doesn't mean anything or energy or what ever.
1 full sentry can block for nearly 1 minute. So increasing FF energy doesn't mean shiti if you have 1-2 sentrys.
If a Zerg is stupid enough to leave units in side is base, or is to gready to even build units instead to be alittle aggressiv and keep them in the open for flanks, he deserves to lose in this state of the game.
the whole reason this works is only because Zerg is greedy and not build enough units.
Sure max economy is a good goal, but if it in turn loses you the game what the point?
even a handful of Zerglings + Spines are a pretty good defense against any 4 gate and also can threaten and harass any Sentry expand.
Yea i was really suprised at how little spines july made in those games, i think its because hes so used to being aggresive and planning on going on the aggresive soon, and i agree zerg is a balancing act between units and drones but if maxing out on your economy is losing you the game then you need to start making units or be like nestea and just know when to make units and stock up on larva early game while consistently making a few drones at a time(but doesnt go all out on the drones until he knows aggression isnt coming for sure)
|
Why it's not imba+ Show Spoiler +Sentries were not the main factor in winning this game, the sentries were just there to convince the 3 gate expand. Had July seen what MC was doing he could have easily won.
Thank you for pointing this out. I, along with most people, must have misconstrued the 490 minutes (I watched again, that is accurate to within 3 seconds) of consecutive ramp blocking that halved July's effective army as a main factor in winning. I don't know whether forcefield is imbalanced. I think its necessary in a lot of ways because the game has been maturing with it as a major factor in protoss play. However, in some cases I consider it ridiculously abusive, and in the case of these finals, I don't think I'm the only one who found these finals much less entertaining because of it.
In fact, the only game MC didn't have mass forcefields... I think he lost.
|
I love how people say the loser made tons of mistakes when really they mean, "the loser didnt rush for a ton of roaches and burrow before being able to scout that it would be needed", or more generally, "july didnt execute the perfect answer that would have been needed although he had no way of knowing what the threat was, and thus what the answer should be".
|
Bait forcfields (like terrans have to do)
Run mutas away (like good harassment is supposed to do)
Do you ever hear Protoss whine that terran build marines and turrets when they go phoenix? Do you think the existence of queens and spores prevent people for attacking with 1-2 voidrays? Do you think banshee/dt players whine about how op spore crawlers are?
Please, l2play and stop letting your a-move-habit get revealed in public.
Bait a forcefield with an one base all-in? And then wait, and wait, oh there is another one... one base agression failed -> gg
Run mutas away is a good one. 3 mutas dont do ANY dmg and even 1 stalker is a motal threat. so you have 300/300 + no other units because of your cool "one base muta aggression" and suggest running away?
Nice try confusing new players that you can beat them up more easy
You realy compare VR and phoenix (more stabe and faster) with mutalisks? Let alone the tech time...
get out of bronze before you tell other players how to play
|
On March 22 2011 19:57 cheesemaster wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2011 18:40 lorkac wrote:On March 22 2011 18:24 cheesemaster wrote:On March 20 2011 16:17 MrBitter wrote:On March 20 2011 16:13 Active.815 wrote: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? He's saying its not imba, and while they secured MC's victory they wouldnt've been necessary for him to win because of july's mistakes 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. hmm thats a really subjective statement, you have no idea how much those forcefields actually did and while they helped had july not made mistakes and rushed to burrow he would have been fine anyways, there are so many factors that contributed to july's loss forcefields being OP was not one of those factors. Let's assume that forcefields *were* OP. The forcefields were still not what allowed MC to win. agreed, but honestly forcefields are the backbone of the protoss early game army there isnt much they could change that wouldnt seriously hurt protoss , maybe duration but thats about it. Forcefields are not op , mc forcefields well maybe lol
Anyone who watched any of the games, especially game one, and says that forcefield WASN'T a major (the most major) factor in MC's victory, is lying to themselves. I'm not saying whether or not its imbalanced, but July would have easily held off that push if the units from his main could ever have joined in the fight.
|
On March 22 2011 20:39 SuPerFlyTNT wrote:
Anyone who watched any of the games, especially game one, and says that forcefield WASN'T a major (the most major) factor in MC's victory, is lying to themselves. I'm not saying whether or not its imbalanced, but July would have easily held off that push if the units from his main could ever have joined in the fight.
yeah and the reason was that Zerg didn't make units, so they had to be build inside his base after it is to late.
May be Zerg needs to build some units instead of Drones and just buy time so those units get out in time?...
it so easy to blame everything on forcefields.
Obviously FF was the deciding factor, but not real reason he lost.
|
May be Zerg needs to build some units instead of Drones and just buy time so those units get out in time?...
good idea!
and if he doesnt cancel the expansion you have a ton of units, but still less than protoss AND you are economical behind.
The perfect strategy to win.
Seriously I get the feeling Toss is getting greedier and greedier while developing builds which cant be engaged without going all in and are able to outtech and outproduce zerg while having on top of all an equal economy
|
May be Zerg needs to build some units instead of Drones and just buy time so those units get out in time?...
Aye, if zerg knows that a 4gate is coming, then zerg can build units instead of drones.
But in cases like that one, where zerg has no posibility to know if its going to be a 4gate, and the toss cut probes, or if its a 3gate, and toss is chronoboosting probes like mad, then its just not that easy.
Sure, zerg can decide to blindly make a ton of units instead of drones. But then what?
If its a 4gate, it works out in the zerg's favor.
If its a 3gate expand, then zerg is left with a bunch of units that are completely useless in the face of 7 sentries, and is at 20 drones compared to the 30 probes of toss. In other words, incredibly far behind.
No one is denying the fact that if zerg blindly goes for the correct response, zerg has a good chance of winning.
But its just a gamble. blindly go for something, drones or units, burrow or hydras, and so on, and if you got the right one, you can defend and get an advantage, if you dont, you immediatly lose.
Its mostly related to zerg scouting options just being absolutely terrible.
But forcefields also play a big role. If it werent for forcefields, then building units instead of drones early on could actually put some pressure on the toss. If it werent for forcefields, then units built in reacting to an incoming push would have a chance to take part in the battle. And so on.
|
On March 22 2011 17:41 lorkac wrote:
All-ins are present in all three races. Zerg players just need to learn to use them more often, or at least as often as Protoss and Terran do. The different build produce different gas timings, different inject timings and more importantly they throw off the opponent's scout timings. Even if 2-3 of the builds produce relatively similar results, they all look different from each other when scouted
Can I ask a couple of questions and not get my head bitten off?
The way I see it - which might be wrong; this is just a starting point for discussion - yes, Zerg does have all-ins. However:
1. Zerg doesn't have all-ins that can be disguised as macro play right up to the last moment.
1.1 More generally, as you say: "Even if 2-3 of the builds produce relatively similar results, they all look different from each other when scouted". That's the opposite of the problem Zerg faces, where similar looking enemy builds produce very different results and need very different responses that have to be started well in advance. On the other hand it seems like all a Protoss or Terran needs to know is broadly whether Zerg is playing aggressively or passively - the details aren't terribly important because they don't demand radically different responses.
2. Zerg all-ins are, as they should be, effective against risky builds. They don't work against safe, middle-of-the-road builds like a 3-gate sentry expand.
2.1. This I'm less confident of: it feels like Zerg cannot usually detect a 'risky' build in time to punish it with an all-in.
3. Zerg doesn't have safe, middle of the road builds like a 3-gate sentry expand, something that will get you into the midgame on a solid economic footing whilst being able to respond effectively to signs of aggression. Zerg gets its 'delay opponent's aggression' tech at Lair.
3.1 Consequently, Protoss and Terran all-ins against Zerg don't have to worry about encountering a 'safe' build. They only have to worry about encountering the perfect counter, the odds of which are naturally low and can be further reduced through deception.
I'd love to know which of these points you disagree with - what leads you to believe Zerg is in fact in a position of equal opportunity in the early-mid game, and everyone who plays it is (to paraphrase your earlier posts) a sulky, spoiled brat with no imagination or creativity
|
On March 22 2011 20:56 morimacil wrote:
Aye, if zerg knows that a 4gate is coming, then zerg can build units instead of drones.
But in cases like that one, where zerg has no posibility to know if its going to be a 4gate, and the toss cut probes, or if its a 3gate, and toss is chronoboosting probes like mad, then its just not that easy.
Sure, zerg can decide to blindly make a ton of units instead of drones. But then what?
If its a 4gate, it works out in the zerg's favor.
If its a 3gate expand, then zerg is left with a bunch of units that are completely useless in the face of 7 sentries, and is at 20 drones compared to the 30 probes of toss. In other words, incredibly far behind.
No one is denying the fact that if zerg blindly goes for the correct response, zerg has a good chance of winning.
But its just a gamble. blindly go for something, drones or units, burrow or hydras, and so on, and if you got the right one, you can defend and get an advantage, if you dont, you immediatly lose.
Its mostly related to zerg scouting options just being absolutely terrible.
But forcefields also play a big role. If it werent for forcefields, then building units instead of drones early on could actually put some pressure on the toss. If it werent for forcefields, then units built in reacting to an incoming push would have a chance to take part in the battle. And so on.
you don't get what i am saying, first of all MC didn't have much units until the 4 Gate kicked in,
even if you had like 10-15 speedling those would have buyed enough time and baited some forcefields to give you enough time so your units get build and come down to the ramp.
So many Zergs try to squeeze just to many Drones out while only building 4-5 zerglings until the attack is seen coming, look at julys match. If he had been alittle more aggressiv with his poking it would have given him both more information and also bought time.
That the only and easy solution to this. And building 10-15 Zerglings no way cripples Zergs economy, it just keeps it balance with your opponents. And also keeps Protoss in the defensiv if he is not going for an all in, thus giving your even more room to drone.
The decision to blindly make only drone is a mistake and there is no discussing that away.
MC just showed there is a timing where Zergs get to greedy when they should have been actually more cautious about their scouting intel. Zerg sure will have to rethink their drone timing when new timings are introducted. sometimes beeing too reactive can backfire in that sense cause this is what makes mindgames work.
I doubt that this will work as good again now that people are aware of it and that proves that not FF are the reason it works but mostly the mindgame behind it. don't get how people can't see that.
(talking about Game 1 here)
|
So many Zergs try to squeeze just to many Drones out while only building 4-5 zerglings until the attack is seen coming, look at julys match. If he had been alittle more aggressiv with his poking it would have given him both more information and also bought time.
Yes, of course. If hed made a bunch of lings, he would have been fine. Again, no one is denying the fact that if july had blindly executed the couter to a 4gate without having the possibility to know it was coming, he would have been perfectly fine.
And building 10-15 Zerglings no way cripples Zergs economy, it just keeps it balance with your opponents. 15 extra lings is 7 drones. that is quite a lot, that is quite crippling to have 7 less drones when going into the midgame against a 3gate expand.
The decision to blindly make only drone is a mistake and there is no discussing that away.
The decision to make drones when seeing a nexus and a bunch of sentries and being denied all other scouting information is a good decision.
If you see a 3gate expand, and you make lings, thats a bad decision. If hes doing an actual 3gate expand, all those lings you made WILL put you behind, unless he screws up his forcefields, and ALLOWS you to do damage with those lings.
The whole idea of "zergs are being too greedy" when a zerg sees what looks in all aspects like an unbreakable economic opening and drones, is just BS. Seriously.
Your main argument is that zergs should make a ton of lings when they see a 3gate expand, because its safer. But if a zerg does that, they are way behind, and they die in the midgame.
You can not play zerg by reacting to a safe economical opening by making a bunch of units, and sitting around on them, or suiciding them, and hoping the toss screws up his forcefields. Its just not a viable way to play, because it will put you really far behind most of the time.
Zerg sure will have to rethink their drone timing when new timings are introducted
Ok, help us out here to rethink it.
Lets think about it for a second. You see what looks to be a 3gate expand. If you make units, you fall incredibly far behind. If you make drones, and its not a 3gate expand, you die. Its impossible for you to get any extra scouting information.
Whats the optimal drone timing there? Answer: There isnt one, because its just a complete gamble. Flip a coin, pick units or drones, and if you did the wrong thing, you lose!
___________________________________
Saying that droning when you see what looks like a 3gate is a mistake is stupid. Why would it be a mistake? Because theres the off chance that he might be doing a very clever hidden 4gate?
Lets take another situation. TvZ, lair just finished, terran scans the zerg, sees a spire nearly done, and makes turrets. Is that a mistake? reacting upon the information your scouting gave you is a mistake? What about if the zerg had a hidden hydraden somewhere, and is doing a hydrapush and the spire was just a distraction? The decision to make turrets when seeing a spire is still just as correct as the decision to drone when seeing a 3gate.
If you see a 3gate expand, and start making units on the off chance that it might be a 4gate that is designed to look like a 3gate expand... THAT would be a mistake. because then, you are scouting as well as possible, and then completely ignoring the information you gained from scouting.
|
It not me who has to think and adapt to that,
as far as i can see other Zergs are adapting (Strategy section).
(i see increasing Aggression against 3 Gate FE on ladder and it works quite well)
|
Agression against 3gate FE works as well as your opponent lets it. If hes sleeping, and forgets to forcefield, or doesnt forcefield properly, you can completely crush him and his expo. If he has good forcefields, you just put yourself super far behind, and you lose!
|
Zergs can teleport nydus worms through floating islands in space, they should be able to get drones to widen the construction of their ramps so they don't get easygg'ed by sentries.
: ]
trollness aside, it was sick games regardless but it showed how good protoss can be.
grats to july for making it that far though.
|
thank YOU, a nice fresh cup of joe and balance from all the QQers in other threads =D
July lost game one and three due to scouting issues for sure, MC did solid timing atacks for all four games he won(maybe not the last one)
|
On March 22 2011 18:53 jazzbassmatt wrote:
MC definitely outplayed July. However, I still think there were some things that made it harder for July:
-against a good player like MC, overlord scouting is much less effective
-good FF usage like MC further enhances the toss's ability to throw off zerg.
-Forge FE puts the zerg in a tricky position. If they open speedling and don't pressure, they will have a really hard time getting the economic advantage they need in the mid to late game.
This is a good summary of what happened.
|
On March 22 2011 21:53 Umpteen wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2011 17:41 lorkac wrote:
All-ins are present in all three races. Zerg players just need to learn to use them more often, or at least as often as Protoss and Terran do. The different build produce different gas timings, different inject timings and more importantly they throw off the opponent's scout timings. Even if 2-3 of the builds produce relatively similar results, they all look different from each other when scouted Can I ask a couple of questions and not get my head bitten off? The way I see it - which might be wrong; this is just a starting point for discussion - yes, Zerg does have all-ins. However: 1. Zerg doesn't have all-ins that can be disguised as macro play right up to the last moment. 1.1 More generally, as you say: "Even if 2-3 of the builds produce relatively similar results, they all look different from each other when scouted". That's the opposite of the problem Zerg faces, where similar looking enemy builds produce very different results and need very different responses that have to be started well in advance. On the other hand it seems like all a Protoss or Terran needs to know is broadly whether Zerg is playing aggressively or passively - the details aren't terribly important because they don't demand radically different responses. 2. Zerg all-ins are, as they should be, effective against risky builds. They don't work against safe, middle-of-the-road builds like a 3-gate sentry expand. 2.1. This I'm less confident of: it feels like Zerg cannot usually detect a 'risky' build in time to punish it with an all-in. 3. Zerg doesn't have safe, middle of the road builds like a 3-gate sentry expand, something that will get you into the midgame on a solid economic footing whilst being able to respond effectively to signs of aggression. Zerg gets its 'delay opponent's aggression' tech at Lair. 3.1 Consequently, Protoss and Terran all-ins against Zerg don't have to worry about encountering a 'safe' build. They only have to worry about encountering the perfect counter, the odds of which are naturally low and can be further reduced through deception. I'd love to know which of these points you disagree with - what leads you to believe Zerg is in fact in a position of equal opportunity in the early-mid game, and everyone who plays it is (to paraphrase your earlier posts) a sulky, spoiled brat with no imagination or creativity
11Pool18Hatch is an eco build disguised as an all in build
Kyrix Baneling aggressing is an all-in build disguised as a 14hatch
July's NoQueen baneling 1base baneling timing push looks like a standard 14hatch15pool
However, since so few players perform these kind of tricky plays--protoss and terran players get very comfortable and seem to "not have to worry." This is a metagame problem, not a balance problem.
However, I do agree that Zerg need's *better* scouting options. Not necessarily more scouting options, just better ones. But the fixes should not be so heavy handed like "increase overlord speed" or "move speed tech to hatchery."
Personally, queens spawning with 50 energy fixes most of Zerg's problems in the early game. It allows Zerg to have fast lings within his base for defense without needing to get zergling speed so early. This allows for an earlier lair without sacrificing too much.
The reason for this is because Zerg's early game options are tier one responses without progressing the tech tree. A Cybernetics Core leads to tier 2. Tech labs enhances tier 2. However, roach warrens and baneling nests aren't so great *until* you get tier two.
Giving Zerg easier access to tier 2 allows zerg to have the possibility of rushing their tech safely forcing your opponents to be mindful of possible tech builds.
Currently, most terran/toss mind games are trying to figure out how many zerglings he can force out of zerg. However, against terran or toss Banshee/Voidray/DT/blue flame rushes are stuff that *needs* a specific response from anyone, Zerg doesn't have that yet. On that part I agree.
|
Giving Zerg easier access to tier 2 allows zerg to have the possibility of rushing their tech safely forcing your opponents to be mindful of possible tech builds.
Not really.
Easier access to T2 would be nice, then we could get overseers and have actual real scouting options.
But as for rushing tech forcing the opponents to be mindful, that doesnt work due to the way zerg is designed.
Zerg units suck. They only become decently scary when in high numbers.
no terran or toss going for a reasonable build is going to be scared when they see 4 mutas they didnt expect. 4 cloaked banchees, and you arent prepared? thats scary. 4 phoenixes if you arent prepared is pretty damn scary as zerg.
4 mutas, is just not scary at all, you need 30 mutas to be scary.
Same with hydras.
I guess having 2-3 infestors early could be good, or 1-3 broodlords, but thos take for ever to tech to anyway.
For anything else, you need like 60 food of it before you have the posibility of doing any damage.
So a world in which zerg can rush for tech and force the opponents to be mindful is just not goig to happen.
Heck, even if you could build a spire at T1, it would be mostly useless, because you cant support any decent number of mutas before you have 4 geysers, and your nat is at least partially saturated.
|
really the forcefields did help. But if it was something that cost him the game he should of considered getting ultras (lol). But MC simply bluffed/outplayed/outsmarted July in this particular match.
|
On March 23 2011 01:37 morimacil wrote:Show nested quote +
Giving Zerg easier access to tier 2 allows zerg to have the possibility of rushing their tech safely forcing your opponents to be mindful of possible tech builds.
Not really. Easier access to T2 would be nice, then we could get overseers and have actual real scouting options. But as for rushing tech forcing the opponents to be mindful, that doesnt work due to the way zerg is designed. Zerg units suck. They only become decently scary when in high numbers. no terran or toss going for a reasonable build is going to be scared when they see 4 mutas they didnt expect. 4 cloaked banchees, and you arent prepared? thats scary. 4 phoenixes if you arent prepared is pretty damn scary as zerg. 4 mutas, is just not scary at all, you need 30 mutas to be scary. Same with hydras. I guess having 2-3 infestors early could be good, or 1-3 broodlords, but thos take for ever to tech to anyway. For anything else, you need like 60 food of it before you have the posibility of doing any damage. So a world in which zerg can rush for tech and force the opponents to be mindful is just not goig to happen. Heck, even if you could build a spire at T1, it would be mostly useless, because you cant support any decent number of mutas before you have 4 geysers, and your nat is at least partially saturated.
Zergling harass starts at 5 mutas actually. 6-7 you start being able to pick off stray units. 10-15 you can start engaging enemy units. 15-20 you have a death ball of mutas.
Because of the zergling mechanic, you spawn 3-4 mutas in the time it takes terran to spawn 1 banshee.
1 Banshee + cloak = 350m300g
|
3 times you say "should July have done that he would have won easily". Oh please. No zerg upgrade or unit combination results in easy win unless the opponent screws up.
|
Wow, you make it sound so easy to destroy MC. When are you two 1v1ing so you can show us how to scout properly and "punish" his fast expands? I can't wait to see it. Replays?
Never thought Zerg could "easily" defeat MC like you say.
The bottom line is MC doesn't have to scout because Zerg is so limited on their options where as Protoss can 1 gate FE, Nexus First, 3 Gate FE, 4 Gate all in, 5 Gate all in, Void Rush, DT Rush, Phoenix play, Blink Stalker, Proxy 2 Gate, Proxy Stargate and if you don't know which hes doing you can't prepare and will lose. This is the reason July kept making useless tech structures. There is no way of scouting "easily". Especially when they do things like let the nexus almost finish and proxy tech in weird places on the map.
Zerg is limited in what you have to worry about. Having nothing that can jump up and down cliffs, nothing that can attack while burrowed etc. There are no possibilities that you can not scout and just insta-lose like you can on the Zerg side. That coupled with FF making it almost impossible to punish for fast expanding makes Zerg spread too thin. You can't out expo and account for DTs and Voids when you only have Queens and Hydra that can shoot up and you can't get Lair and a Queen simultaneously. So when you expand you're open to VR/DT issues, when you don't expo and cover DT/VR possibilities you are behind in army count.
|
July did it vs anypro
Losira did it vs Huk
And that's just the march GSL.
Even the game that July won vs MC. He didn't "respond properly" at all and lost a lot and yet was still able to win by simply choosing to be more aggressive instead of thinking of unit counters. He committed to his strat instead of canceling upgrades and making buildings that he didn't use like he did in the other 4 games against MC.
So please, stop pretending like Zerg can't punish FE protoss because Losira, July and Moon(almost) were able to heavily punish FE protoss with aggression.
Don't be blind and blame your losses on imba when pro players have shown you how to beat it already. If you think it's impossible, tell July yourself that his aggression was dumb and he didn't belong in the finals. Tell Losira that he shouldn't have gone roaches against Huk's Sentry FE because that would have prevented Losira from getting to the finals. Tell Moon that his strategy was dumb against ACE even though he was the only one to almost beat him in IEM.
Please, tell these guys that they suck for getting to the finals by beating FE sentry play. Please do.
|
July lost because sentries make it impossible to be aggressive with tier 1 units, and they blocked his ramp to stop reinforcements, split his units apart, and generally both kept him from being aggressive and from engaging with his full army vs MC's full army.
Imbalanced? That's a different thing. But the original post seems to suggests sentries weren't important, while they were pretty much the deciding factor in most games - and also is a big deal because it makes early aggression tactic useless vs protoss as a zerg, unless you go for a cheese.
It could be handled differently for certain, but really, watching those games and concluding sentries weren't the most effective thing used, and the deciding factor - you must have missed it, because they were.
That doesn't really mean much about balance (a 5 game sample isn't much) - but the whole original post seems to be a defense for why sentries don't need to be nerfed, and that's just not what those games showed.
|
July lost because he was greatly outmacroed. Game 1? Forcefield stopped 2 roaches. Game 2? MC had te bigger army. Game 4? July got outmacroed hard as can be read in the live report thread of "omg how did he get that many dudes" if It wasn't 7 sentries then it would have been 7 other gateway unit and July would have still died.
Forcefield had nothing to do with it. It simply made a loss into a total and complete domination.
|
On March 23 2011 05:53 lorkac wrote:
Even the game that July won vs MC. He didn't "respond properly" at all and lost a lot and yet was still able to win by simply choosing to be more aggressive instead of thinking of unit counters. He committed to his strat instead of canceling upgrades and making buildings that he didn't use like he did in the other 4 games against MC.
Hydra drop counters Forge FE, but won't work against 3Gate FE because in order to beat hydras until you get colossi, you need a lot of gateway units - you can't get enough in time with Forge FE. Poor example imo.
|
On March 23 2011 04:22 TRod wrote:
Wow, you make it sound so easy to destroy MC. When are you two 1v1ing so you can show us how to scout properly and "punish" his fast expands? I can't wait to see it. Replays?
Never thought Zerg could "easily" defeat MC like you say.
The bottom line is MC doesn't have to scout because Zerg is so limited on their options where as Protoss can 1 gate FE, Nexus First, 3 Gate FE, 4 Gate all in, 5 Gate all in, Void Rush, DT Rush, Phoenix play, Blink Stalker, Proxy 2 Gate, Proxy Stargate and if you don't know which hes doing you can't prepare and will lose. This is the reason July kept making useless tech structures. There is no way of scouting "easily". Especially when they do things like let the nexus almost finish and proxy tech in weird places on the map.
Zerg is limited in what you have to worry about. Having nothing that can jump up and down cliffs, nothing that can attack while burrowed etc. There are no possibilities that you can not scout and just insta-lose like you can on the Zerg side. That coupled with FF making it almost impossible to punish for fast expanding makes Zerg spread too thin. You can't out expo and account for DTs and Voids when you only have Queens and Hydra that can shoot up and you can't get Lair and a Queen simultaneously. So when you expand you're open to VR/DT issues, when you don't expo and cover DT/VR possibilities you are behind in army count.
All of those builds can be scouted and easily be responded given a correct overlord sac at around 4:45. The problem is that protoss can disguise it quite easily by seeming to go 3 gate expo, but instead go 5 gate-all in in which you feel like you don't have to scout if he goes 5 gates.
Also, our stalkers and sentries are crap AA so it's the same thing (they're good against AA units such as mutas until crit mass and broodlords, they suck against banshees and bc's in cost-even fights).
You can get a lair on one hatchery, and a queen on another. Dt's lose to a spine crawler + spore crawler (only viable once on 3 near saturated bases). You can stop 1 base dt's quite easily though.
However, the void rays are a problem. I was playing zerg for a while (3.3k master toss) and it's quite fun, but void rays are just annoying. You usually have to ALWAYS get a preemptive spire for the colossi, and now you need it slightly earlier to chase down void rays just because void rays can come earlier.
Oh, and usually, on the map you're playing you should be able to "cut" the type of BO's protoss could be going. Blink stalkers are shit on low-ground-less maps, and 15 nex/forge fe is terribad on wide choke maps such as Slag Pits.
Oh, and 1 base void ray is usuall weak unless you can deceive your opponent, such as Squirtle against Idra. Most zergs, as far as I can tell, worry about 2 stargate more because it's annoying.
|
On March 22 2011 17:41 lorkac wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2011 17:23 imbs wrote:On March 22 2011 17:15 lorkac wrote:On March 22 2011 17:08 Charon1979 wrote:
Yeah. It's like, you can't just hatch at 14 every match while the other two races have to have different builds depending on enemy race, distance, map size as well as what the opponent's build is.
Can you imagine playing zerg and having to have different builds depending on what you scout instead of simply building a hatchery at 14 and whining when it doesn't work? Wow, yeah, silly of me to think that build orders should be more dynamic--what was I thinking.
Oh... I would love to. Sadly zerg mechanics deny this. Any expansion later than 21 is an all-in I would love to not haveing always 1 - 2 bases more and i realy would like to keep up on one base with a 2 base toss =) It's too bad you don't have as many options at your disposal as Protoss and Terran, it really is. I mean, not even counting new possible builds you only have 9 not counting 3RR, 6Pool, 7Pool, 7RR, 5RR, 1BaseMuta, EarlyHydraDrop, NydusRush, etc.... So few options for zerg... and that's only counting the stuff people use on ladder! just fyi no one can actually lose to most of those builds - even if its unscouted untill its on ur ramp you should hold alot of those np and shouldnt really be used by any zerg - things like 1base muta are a joke and early hydra drop never works unless its a response to a specific style ala wat july did. no, zergs do not have as many options as t or p Too bad for Genius when he got Nydus rushed Too bad TheWind didn't know that 1base roach sucks when he used it to win a game in the gsl too made Hydra Drop was the only time July has ever beaten MC. Too bad 6pool was something July and Fruitdealer both got to the finals of a GSL. No one told Losira that heavy roach builds were bad when he used it to beat Huk. You know what, just tell pro-zergs that are winning that they suck. It saves the TL forums the trouble. Or we could just theorycraft if you want?
hilarious. yea fruitdealer does really well with all his nydus play man, wat is he, most underachieving player playing the game atm? yea man cancelling ur expo and all-inning a protoss with a total defense of one cannon worked man who would have thought. hydra drops are hugely situational aswell, as i mentioned in the post u quoted. when you are gonna be as aggressive at posting as you are you should know what you are talking about. whether you like it or not and irregardless of balance zerg has far less early game options than t or p.
|
On March 23 2011 05:53 lorkac wrote:
If you think it's impossible, tell July yourself that his aggression was dumb and he didn't belong in the finals. Tell Losira that he shouldn't have gone roaches against Huk's Sentry FE because that would have prevented Losira from getting to the finals. Tell Moon that his strategy was dumb against ACE even though he was the only one to almost beat him in IEM.
Please, tell these guys that they suck for getting to the finals by beating FE sentry play. Please do.
Losira beat Huk's cannon rush via trickery; then went all-in one-base roach, as it was the only way to avoid dropping way behind economically.
Take a look at game one of Huk v Losira, where Zerg won only because he was able to be greedier than the safe Protoss build. Losira had constant pressure applied to Huk and couldn't get anything accomplished on offense until his 4th (gold) base was up. Huk didn't even bother to build a stalker until 10 minutes and still had absolutely no problem defending Losira's speedlings.
July 6-pooled. Let's say that again: he 6-pooled. He beat forge expand through the most all-in build in the game, and even then only because anypro didn't wall in his main.
It's a sign of the effectiveness of safe PvZ builds that your three examples are two cheeses and a loss.
|
4gate and 6gates are also all in.
In fact, MC did the nexus cancel just like losira did the hatch cancel.
Zerg can cheese and all in just as well as Protoss and Terran can. In fact, the most succesful of the Zerg players in the current gsl won by willing
to and actually using them. They won by attacking early and often. They won by being greedy only when their opponents were on the defensive.
The only thing stopping Zerg players is pride. So suck it up and start using the tools you're given.
|
So we're back to the point where the key for zerg is all-in-ing faster than the protoss or pulling out the near-miracle defense. Melee units find it really hard to break down those wall ins (when was the last time you saw a 6 gate work on a small ramp?).
The most successful Zerg in GSL March were able to utilize truly ridiculous numbers of banelings, which requires a HUGE income edge and not too much Terran/Protoss air power or mech.
+ Show Spoiler [TSL spoiler] +See TSL's MorroW v Jinro from this last weekend for more proof.
And it's not "just like losira"
Losira managed to cancel the hatchery in time to void Huk's rush. MC cancelled a decoy nexus that ensured his trick would be undetectable. It's the difference between a sacrifice so that the game doesn't end and part of the deception.
This is a rather meaningless sidebar. The quick Forge was always a risky but flexible (can be either the cannon rush or fast expend) build. The point stands that Protoss have the 3gate sentry expand that MC and Huk (just to use two matches you've referenced) showed were impregnable in the early game, and Huk even was wildly out of position!
|
In GSTL today, SlayersMin + Show Spoiler +went pool into hatch on Tal'Darim Altar without getting gas, and looked quite good and safe doing so. He took a 3rd when it became clear Inca was doing Forge FE.
July needs to do more than gas/pool on these huge maps, and he even got lucky with positioning on Metalopolis and Shakuras. For that matter, he got cross on Crevasse as well. He could have invested more in defense other than really early game because of the stronger economy. It's not really "wasted because MC didn't attack" if your alternative is to open gas/pool and have less stuff at the same game time.
The obvious trade-off is, does that die to some four warp gate, or is the early ling speed that critical? I don't see why you should die to an early four warp gate on those large maps. As far as Metal goes, July got the best possible position. Furthermore, if it's that early, it may be possible to keep the drone alive long enough to scout it or delay it slightly. Or you can hope that early ling speed is effective vs a protoss sitting behind his wall. I don't know the exact timing, but I think you can get ling speed fast enough opening 14 hatch if your intent is to pressure the toss as they 3 gate expand.
|
There can be no question, speedlings are necessary against a 4gate. That push will arrive, regardless of map size, within 7 minutes. That's the beauty of the warp gate, it cuts travel distance down to nothing.
+ Show Spoiler [GSTL rebuttal] +Min was absurdly greedy, had zero scouting intel when he took his third, and would have been roflstomped by any protoss pressure. His first scouting intel was the overlord that arrived at about 6:50, or approximately when a 4gate would have landed. He was absolutely not safe, with zero information, no more than 8 zerglings w/out speed, and 1 queen. Roach warren was only halfway done. Min was very lucky not to get rushed. It happened to work, but this build in the finals... MC wouldn't have even lost a unit.
I don't understand your July analysis. The tradeoff is drones or other units for an early-game zerg, so you can't have more defense and more economy.
|
On March 23 2011 14:27 Ansinjunger wrote:In GSTL today, SlayersMin + Show Spoiler +went pool into hatch on Tal'Darim Altar without getting gas, and looked quite good and safe doing so. He took a 3rd when it became clear Inca was doing Forge FE. . July needs to do more than gas/pool on these huge maps, and he even got lucky with positioning on Metalopolis and Shakuras. For that matter, he got cross on Crevasse as well. He could have invested more in defense other than really early game because of the stronger economy. It's not really "wasted because MC didn't attack" if your alternative is to open gas/pool and have less stuff at the same game time. The obvious trade-off is, does that die to some four warp gate, or is the early ling speed that critical? I don't see why you should die to an early four warp gate on those large maps. As far as Metal goes, July got the best possible position. Furthermore, if it's that early, it may be possible to keep the drone alive long enough to scout it or delay it slightly. Or you can hope that early ling speed is effective vs a protoss sitting behind his wall. I don't know the exact timing, but I think you can get ling speed fast enough opening 14 hatch if your intent is to pressure the toss as they 3 gate expand.
When I used to play zerg I experimented going 14Hatch15Pool17Hatch in an attempt to have an early inbase hatch with delayed queens.
Testing it against my friend who was in diamond I was able to stop both 2gate aggression as well as 4gate aggression. However, this was due to being able to produce 3+ queens at a time.
What eventually happened was that I would use the 3rd hatch to tighten the choke at the ramp and add spine crawlers. Sentries were never able to block the ramp because spines at the top and bottom of the ramp could hold off the attack with ling/transfuse support.
In the end I adapted to the more old style Kyrix play of no gas FE into heavy baneling/roach aggression depending on matchup. Banelings against Terran and Roaches against Protoss. I quickly learned that the 3rd Hatchery was not essential in base defense and what was essential when defending against 4gate was spines. 3-4 spines. Without speed you don't have a lot of map control which means you need a sturdier defensive line. In both cases I began adding an early Evolution chamber into the build because of its incredible weakness to air play.
However, I learned a lot about defending 4gate and 2rax play. The answer in both cases were spines. 3-4 not 1-2. The reason for this is because your zerglings *will* be kited and they *will not* be able to dps as efficiently without speed. The spines act much like sunkens in broodwar dealing most of the damage and being defended by Zerglings.
The build was queen heavy by nature in the early game, depending on creep spread to allow a "cheap" albeit temporary replacement to ling speed.
I stopped using the build the moment my friend began employing Kiwikaki's 2Immortal Drop supported by 4 zealots. The build depends on its spine crawlers for defense in the hopes that delaying gas will allow it to mine so many more mineral than his opponent. It is weak to drop play and air play due to the delayed gas slowing lair tech.
Busting terran and toss bases is also more difficult. The only real way to do it is to do what SlayersMin did and expand like crazy.
|
On March 23 2011 15:06 Wren wrote:There can be no question, speedlings are necessary against a 4gate. That push will arrive, regardless of map size, within 7 minutes. That's the beauty of the warp gate, it cuts travel distance down to nothing. + Show Spoiler [GSTL rebuttal] +Min was absurdly greedy, had zero scouting intel when he took his third, and would have been roflstomped by any protoss pressure. His first scouting intel was the overlord that arrived at about 6:50, or approximately when a 4gate would have landed. He was absolutely not safe, with zero information, no more than 8 zerglings w/out speed, and 1 queen. Roach warren was only halfway done. Min was very lucky not to get rushed. It happened to work, but this build in the finals... MC wouldn't have even lost a unit. I don't understand your July analysis. The tradeoff is drones or other units for an early-game zerg, so you can't have more defense and more economy.
+ Show Spoiler +Min had 8 larva saved up at around the 5:30 mark and didn't use them until his lings got into Inca's natural and he saw the forge and immediately made 8 drones instead of 16 lings.
4gate will normally hit around 630-700 minutes, scouting at 530 gives 3 hatches a full minute of larva production (12 larva) to defend with in addition to the 8 lings. This is not counting the larva injects of the one queen Min had.
By the time a 4gate would have hit Min he would have had 32-60 zerglings.
That being said, I agree that the build is too greedy since a 4gate *will* destroy at least one of those bases.
|
Could people please stop talking about pride, and how zergs should swallow their pride, and 6pool on every map in every matchup, because 6pool is as strong as a 6gate?
Even if 6pool was remotely as strong as 3gate into 6gate, or DT into 6gate, or whatever...
If the only way to beat toss as zerg is to 6pool, that still pretty much proves the point.
|
On March 23 2011 15:36 morimacil wrote:
Could people please stop talking about pride, and how zergs should swallow their pride, and 6pool on every map in every matchup, because 6pool is as strong as a 6gate?
Even if 6pool was remotely as strong as 3gate into 6gate, or DT into 6gate, or whatever...
If the only way to beat toss as zerg is to 6pool, that still pretty much proves the point.
What you're not getting is that the point is not to "always 6pool" or "always banelingbust"
The point is that if zerg *never* does it then protoss and terran will always have initiative. Do you want to know why faking a 3gate is strong? Because protoss 4gate so often that you *have* to worry about the 4gate even if you don't see proof of it!
If 2rax was simply an all in then it would go the way of bitbybit and disappear. What's strong about 2rax is that terran are starting to open 2rax without even intending to rush because they know that Zerg *has* to assume that terran will all in.
You know what protoss or terran do when they see pool first? "I guess I won't cannon/bunker their natural"
Protoss and Terran never think "Pool first? I best build cannons/bunkers at my ramp!"
Why is that? Because Zerg don't all in. Why would Protoss or Terran ever worry about an early pool? They assume that it's just a different way for Zerg to macro up. They feel no pressure because it statistically never happens.
|
Protoss and Terran never think "Pool first? I best build cannons/bunkers at my ramp!"
Why is that? Because Zerg don't all in.
Its not all that much because zergs dont all-in, as much as just because most zerg all-ins are so weak that terran and toss dont actually need extra defenses to hold them off.
In cases where they do something risky, like for example a toss going forge FE, there, since its risky, the toss does have to be super worried about getting roach rushed and so on. And rightfully so, because they are taking a big risk.
But when they go for something relatively safe, like a 3gate expand, they just dont need to worry about it.
You can always all-in a zerg, and have a relatively good chance of success. But to all-in a terran or a toss, you need to do so when they have left themselves vulnerable to it.
|
Why is that? Because Zerg don't all in. Why would Protoss or Terran ever worry about an early pool? They assume that it's just a different way for Zerg to macro up. They feel no pressure because it statistically never happens.
hat is because even it is a 6 pool, you are not in any danger.
Hell... i can hold off most of the 6 pools using my drones alone without any preperation.
All a toss has to do is placeing a probe next to their choke and wall off a few seconds
|
On March 23 2011 16:52 morimacil wrote:Show nested quote +Protoss and Terran never think "Pool first? I best build cannons/bunkers at my ramp!"
Why is that? Because Zerg don't all in. Its not all that much because zergs dont all-in, as much as just because most zerg all-ins are so weak that terran and toss dont actually need extra defenses to hold them off. In cases where they do something risky, like for example a toss going forge FE, there, since its risky, the toss does have to be super worried about getting roach rushed and so on. And rightfully so, because they are taking a big risk. But when they go for something relatively safe, like a 3gate expand, they just dont need to worry about it. You can always all-in a zerg, and have a relatively good chance of success. But to all-in a terran or a toss, you need to do so when they have left themselves vulnerable to it.
Yeah thats exactly the point. ever worried about a baneling bust as terran? build a bunker behind your wall in, and when u feel safe sacrifice it.
ever worried about a baneling bust as protoss? get 1 sentry and FF half of their banes off? well it didnt occur, you have a unit that gets better as time goes by.
Ever worried about a 4gate as zerg? build 2 spinecrawlers and a round of zerglings. it didnt occur? you lost 2drones and 5-8 larvae that should have been drones and got some static Ds and units that get weaker as times goes by.
ever done a 6,7,8pool? against a toss or terra? I had a day when I decided to only 7pool against every player. I won like 4 of 10 games. 3 against Zergs, 1 against a Terran that low-up-lowed his supply depot for his scout. I killed 1 gateway against a Protoss before his 1 canon was up, but he had enough buildings behind his dying gateway to block me out and I lost trying to transition into a standard game. (ok I didnt get to play on Scrap station against P/T that day, may have worked better there!)
Have you seen Idra vs Jinro where Idra tried to 6pool Jinro? Jinro didnt build a wall-in, accidently canceled his first marine and still held!
THATS WHY ZERG DONT ALL-IN
|
Why are people getting warned for their posts and the OP isn't? I though the point of this was to create a discussion (debate if you may). So basically the OP gets to go around saying how the game is completely balanced (not saying it isn't) and basically wins every argument 'cause people who argue against him gets a warning. Wow.
I completely disagree with your arguments about sentries usage not being that important.
For example, In the first game, even if July saw the 3-gate, July was running off two hatches and the only way he could take out a 3-gate push was to reinforce his current army. Now, WITH the sentries, he can only reinforce his army with 1 hatch without a queen where his units die quite easily. You can say it's his fault for not making enough spine crawlers, but MC can expand while completely forcing his opponent to destroy his whole economy (I'm not going to get into imbalanced issues), hence July would've been behind.
At the end of the day, if the protoss doesn't make sentries, roaches alone kill gateway units, and all MC used were gateway units, now put the pieces together.
|
On March 23 2011 15:49 lorkac wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 15:36 morimacil wrote:
Could people please stop talking about pride, and how zergs should swallow their pride, and 6pool on every map in every matchup, because 6pool is as strong as a 6gate?
Even if 6pool was remotely as strong as 3gate into 6gate, or DT into 6gate, or whatever...
If the only way to beat toss as zerg is to 6pool, that still pretty much proves the point. What you're not getting is that the point is not to "always 6pool" or "always banelingbust" The point is that if zerg *never* does it then protoss and terran will always have initiative. Do you want to know why faking a 3gate is strong? Because protoss 4gate so often that you *have* to worry about the 4gate even if you don't see proof of it! If 2rax was simply an all in then it would go the way of bitbybit and disappear. What's strong about 2rax is that terran are starting to open 2rax without even intending to rush because they know that Zerg *has* to assume that terran will all in. You know what protoss or terran do when they see pool first? "I guess I won't cannon/bunker their natural" Protoss and Terran never think "Pool first? I best build cannons/bunkers at my ramp!" Why is that? Because Zerg don't all in. Why would Protoss or Terran ever worry about an early pool? They assume that it's just a different way for Zerg to macro up. They feel no pressure because it statistically never happens.
Um actually, I'm a terran and I'm not in the slightest afraid of 6pool, if you micro correctly, it's not too hard to fend it off. And I think you lack the understanding of the MU of TvZ (I play T so I don't know about PvZ) but an all-in by Terran doesn't give as much up to an all-in by a Zerg. For example, a one-base baneling bust fail is an automatic loss whereas, something like a failed cloaked banshee rush can transition into the mid-game. It's the numerous compositions and openings T and P that make them so strong. Z on the other hand seems to only have 1 type of unit composition and transition in each MU which makes them so predictable. So at the end of the day, you have to take huge gambles in order to win.
|
that wouldn't have happend if july had focussed on building at least some units earlier.
How would it be balanced if Zerg does focus on max Economy, building no units and your opponent is faking you an Macrogame but goes for a hard all-in and Zerg is still easily defending?...
|
How would it be balanced if Zerg does focus on max Economy, building no units and your opponent is faking you an Macrogame but goes for a hard all-in and Zerg is still easily defending?...
exactly the same way as toss goes for an all-in, gets deflected and still is on even economy.
Toss has to cut probes for a hard striking 4gate? Good news! Zerg also has to do that.
At the beginning you are about 2 drones ahead. If you choose to no stop no matter what Z is ahead 1 base + 2 drones -> you will lose
If you recognize "Hmm... his defense is just to heavy, I go back to probe production, get an expansion and warpin some units zu defend" and you are a bit behind but still in the game.
If a Z goes for an 6 pool or a 5/7/3RR he cant just go back to a macro game after he has done no dmg at all.
Thats why most Z will not go for some silly all-in build. It has nothing to do with "pride" or "honor" but Z all-ins are just that... while toss or terra "all-ins" dont even deserve the name... its more a "higher risk"
|
Zerg does have all ins.
Why do you think most terrans wall up the ramp, or Toss blocking the ramp with gate and cybercore with a zealot against zerg? Because of 6-pool. It doesn't matter if good zerg players rarely do it; the very threat itself necessitates other races to block their ramps and limiting their build orders somewhat.
|
For people who say 6pools don't work, sending out 2 drones at 50 minerals after the pool starts actually gets guys onto their ramp before the wall is up and you can prevent the wall off.
A good 6pool can't be walled off unless they wall off the bottom which favors 6pool because of maximum surround.
Baneling bust all ins and roach all ins have been successful in the recent GSL.
I'm not talking about your experiences on ladder, I'm talking about major tournaments. I'm not talking about my experiences as playing either zerg or terran, I'm talking about the results and the metagame of the GSL.
Anecdotal comments such as "Oh it never works, I play _____ and when ___ happens I feel _____" don't mean much in actual discussion.
ever worried about a baneling bust as terran? build a bunker behind your wall in, and when u feel safe sacrifice it.
ever worried about a baneling bust as protoss? get 1 sentry and FF half of their banes off?
Do you know when people expect a baneling bust? When you spot the nest. No one goes "Pool at 14? It may be a bust! Bunker up!" it's always "Oh look, a nest, I better enforce my wall"
When Julyzerg did the hatch cancel trick to hide a baneling nest at his natural his opponent was caught with his pants down because the opponent saw pool first and said "meh, whatever"
When you make arguments, have evidence other than theorycrafting please.
|
On March 23 2011 15:35 lorkac wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Min had 8 larva saved up at around the 5:30 mark and didn't use them until his lings got into Inca's natural and he saw the forge and immediately made 8 drones instead of 16 lings.
4gate will normally hit around 630-700 minutes, scouting at 530 gives 3 hatches a full minute of larva production (12 larva) to defend with in addition to the 8 lings. This is not counting the larva injects of the one queen Min had.
By the time a 4gate would have hit Min he would have had 32-60 zerglings.
That being said, I agree that the build is too greedy since a 4gate *will* destroy at least one of those bases.
+ Show Spoiler +You're right, I had a really hard time seeing that ling run-by, since it was mostly ignored by the cast. 3 bases were already down, but Min wasn't as blind as I had thought.
I couldn't find your July-canceling-hatch move, source?
|
I'm not talking about your experiences on ladder, I'm talking about major tournaments. I'm not talking about my experiences as playing either zerg or terran, I'm talking about the results and the metagame of the GSL.
READ WHAT WE ARE WRITING!
Zerg CAN do all-ins, but they are way weaker than T/Ps all-ins. they ONLY work if T or P takes a risk.
1base roach all in occurs against a NEXUS FIRST build. (some guy against HuK)
Banelings busting barracks occurs against CC FIRST builds. (JulyZerg)
2base Roach all-in occurs against Protoss 3gate expanding and then rushing for colossi.
Baneling busting down Protoss wall-in occured against Forge-fast expand into 1Gateway, Cybercore, double Stargate (Fruitdealer)
those are high risk builds of Terrans an Protoss.
If you consider getting zergling speed, an expansion 25drones, 2queens and a lair a risky build against Protoss at the 6min mark, well then tell me what zerg should do if your opponent denies scouting.
But you cannot survive a properly played 4gate all-in with this setup.
Or a 6gate:
Zerg is running out of time 1base to 1base and doesnt want to all-in, so they expand
Now protoss is running out of time and doesnt want to all-in, so they expand
assuming up to this point the game was properly played and P and Z are even:
Now its the Zergs time to make the decision: all-in or expand BUT 6gate beats both of them, so you have to do some weird build a lot of units thing and not expand until u have a lot of units... which means ur behind in the income, and you are pretty even in production capabilities.
|
On March 24 2011 02:07 Big J wrote:
READ WHAT WE ARE WRITING!
Zerg CAN do all-ins, but they are way weaker than T/Ps all-ins. they ONLY work if T or P takes a risk.
I could to the same argument about the other Races:
Protoss/Terran can do all-ins, ..., they ONLY work if Z takes a risk.
(not building any units except 4 Zerglings and going full macro)
it so funny that people are so shortsided so they can't see that.
|
I just did a write up of Losira's games in the GSTL where he was all inned every game. If Zergs learn from him then all ins won't really work on Zerg anymore.
|
I could to the same argument about the other Races:
Protoss/Terran can do all-ins, ..., they ONLY work if Z takes a risk.
(not building any units except 4 Zerglings and going full macro)
it so funny that people are so shortsided so they can't see that.
did you read the argument with the 4gate? go to 25 drones expansion+speed+lair dont stop mining gas and everything you have left over spend on zerglings, you CANNOT hold!
Do you think this is risky, having 25 drones to protoss ~25?
Do you think it is risky to have 3queens no lair and around 30drones to terrans 30+mules and around 20 zerglings with full map control always being able to produce another 20 and start morphing banelings if he sees an attack and then simply die because his banshees had cloak?
But hey, Terran always has to worry about Zerg cutting all his eco, getting 3mutas after 7min. (LOL)
And hey, Protoss do really fear 5roaches sneaking in his base and then unburrowing to do damage 7min in the game, and the zerg being on one base. (LOL)
(btw. I dont know if you really can get those things by that time, as you need like 500+gas to do those things)
|
On March 24 2011 02:33 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +
I could to the same argument about the other Races:
Protoss/Terran can do all-ins, ..., they ONLY work if Z takes a risk.
(not building any units except 4 Zerglings and going full macro)
it so funny that people are so shortsided so they can't see that.
did you read the argument with the 4gate? go to 25 drones expansion+speed+lair dont stop mining gas and everything you have left over spend on zerglings, you CANNOT hold! Do you think this is risky, having 25 drones to protoss ~25? Do you think it is risky to have 3queens no lair and around 30drones to terrans 30+mules and around 20 zerglings with full map control always being able to produce another 20 and start morphing banelings if he sees an attack and then simply die because his banshees had cloak? But hey, Terran always has to worry about Zerg cutting all his eco, getting 3mutas after 7min. (LOL) And hey, Protoss do really fear 5roaches sneaking in his base and then unburrowing to do damage 7min in the game, and the zerg being on one base. (LOL) (btw. I dont know if you really can get those things by that time, as you need like 500+gas to do those things)
4gate stops at 19probes. 22 if they double gas, but they have to be sentry heavy (which means speedlings can intercept the army in open ground since they don't have as many zealots/stalkers)
Zerg can have 16 drones by the time the pool hatches. They make 4 more drones and Zerg Econ is now better than Protoss Econ (usually with an expansion)
protoss spends all it's money on dudes backed by only 19 probes and Zerg whine that the can't get 25?
(you actually want about 20 drones to stop a 4gate and all you need to scout is the mineral line to know which 4gate it is or isn't (if there is more than 16 probes on minerals then he is not 4gating, see, easy))
now you have a better Econ than the 4gater by simply having 20 drones. You defend. You then drone again when it is safe. Done, easy. What do you do when he doesn't 4gate since your overlord saw more than 16 probes at minerals? Contain him with logs by threatening runbys and delay his expo. Boom, you're now ahead.
Want to theorycraft some more? Because in theorycraft world Zerg wins. Protoss needs for Zerg to overdrone for a 4gate to work. Protoss needs for zerg to overexpand for a 6gate to work. In the world of theory craft, Zerg is OP.
|
I don't get why there is all this imbalance discussion over a 5 game series. MC beating July does not prove imbalance in PvZ any more than MVP demolishing MKP proved imbalance in TvT.
|
No one is denying the fact that is easy to stop a 4gate if you can scout it lorkak. Problem is, the only way you can scout it is if toss makes a mistake.
I could to the same argument about the other Races:
Protoss/Terran can do all-ins, ..., they ONLY work if Z takes a risk.
(not building any units except 4 Zerglings and going full macro)
it so funny that people are so shortsided so they can't see that.
Aye, thats completely true. The all-ins only work because zerg takes a risk.
However, the thing is, with no scouting information, its not very hard for a toss to be safe against zerg all-ins for example, or for a zerg. Toss or terran can do a very safe build, and not really be behind at all.
Zerg, on the other hand, can simply not do that.
I mean, lets say its ZvT for example. What does a terran need to do to be safe against zerg all-ins, with no scouting info?
Wall off with 2-3 large buildings, make 2 bunkers behind them. They want to make 3 large buildings anyway. So total cost to be safe? 200 minerals (refundable)
Now if zerg has no scouting information and wants to be safe against terran, what do we need?
Well, we need speedlings in case of marauders, lets say 20, we need roaches or spines in case of hellions, lets say 4 roaches and a spine, we need some banelings or at least a baneling nest in case of a big bio push, and a third queen for banshees, and a lair, with spire in case of 2 port banshees, and also an overseer in case of 1port with cloak, .....
Total cost to be safe against terran: 2150/550 (non refundable)
Zerg all-ins only work against risky builds by toss or terran. Toss or terran all-ins only work against risky builds by zergs.
But toss and terran have access to very safe build that sacrifice almost no economy.
Zerg can not do a safe build without knowing what the terran or toss is doing. And that much needed scouting can easily be denied by toss or terran.
|
On March 24 2011 03:32 meadbert wrote:
I don't get why there is all this imbalance discussion over a 5 game series. MC beating July does not prove imbalance in PvZ any more than MVP demolishing MKP proved imbalance in TvT.
I'm sure this is just trolling, but I'll point out that it's impossible for a mirror matchup to be imbalanced.
This hasn't been a balance discussion anyway, it's been T/P saying Zerg should use more easily-countered cheese and Zerg saying it's easily countered.
|
On March 24 2011 03:44 morimacil wrote:No one is denying the fact that is easy to stop a 4gate if you can scout it lorkak. Problem is, the only way you can scout it is if toss makes a mistake. Show nested quote +
I could to the same argument about the other Races:
Protoss/Terran can do all-ins, ..., they ONLY work if Z takes a risk.
(not building any units except 4 Zerglings and going full macro)
it so funny that people are so shortsided so they can't see that.
Now if zerg has no scouting information and wants to be safe against terran, what do we need? Well, we need speedlings in case of marauders, lets say 20, we need roaches or spines in case of hellions, lets say 4 roaches and a spine, we need some banelings or at least a baneling nest in case of a big bio push, and a third queen for banshees, and a lair, with spire in case of 2 port banshees, and also an overseer in case of 1port with cloak, ..... Total cost to be safe against terran: 2150/550 (non refundable) scouting can easily be denied by toss or terran.
If you dont know what a terran is doing you are pretty much safe if you make a baneling nest and a third queen, both of which you are gonna be building later on anyways.
|
On March 24 2011 04:30 Wren wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 03:32 meadbert wrote:
I don't get why there is all this imbalance discussion over a 5 game series. MC beating July does not prove imbalance in PvZ any more than MVP demolishing MKP proved imbalance in TvT.
I'm sure this is just trolling, but I'll point out that it's impossible for a mirror matchup to be imbalanced. This hasn't been a balance discussion anyway, it's been T/P saying Zerg should use more easily-countered cheese and Zerg saying it's easily countered.
It's not trolling--it's the most logical statement he could make.
He means that clearly MVP beating MKP in TvT is not indicative of TvT being imbalanced (because it's a ditto and that would be ridiculous), it just means MVP was the better player. Same way that MC beating July is not indicative of PvZ being imbalanced, just that MC was the better player.
It's ridiculous how anyone can think that a 5-game set can solely indicate balance. MC wins and suddenly people are talking as if force fields have always been imbalanced, and that there's absolutely nothing July could have done to win any of those games.
There's been a lot of balance discussion and it doesn't make sense. People complain there isn't enough interesting micro in this game, but when anything risky is shown to be good, people just want to nerf it instead of learning how to deal with it with the tools they already have and adding a new element of gameplay.
|
On March 24 2011 04:36 schiznak wrote:
If you dont know what a terran is doing you are pretty much safe if you make a baneling nest and a third queen, both of which you are gonna be building later on anyways.
Not safe against cloaked banshees.
@[Avarice] some people are going to run to the claim of "imba" even on a single loss or cheese. Most people see them all the same way, as meaningless cries of "wolf."
There's a very significant question at hand that hasn't been answered: Does zerg have a 'safe' opening?
|
On March 24 2011 04:30 Wren wrote:
I'm sure this is just trolling, but I'll point out that it's impossible for a mirror matchup to be imbalanced.
well that is not true actually. but the imbalance can be avoided if both sides do the imbalanced stuff...
that certainly doesn't mean it is not imbalanced.
pvp is the best example for that.
Collossus dominates every techpath cause everything else that protoss has sucks or is a gamble build.
|
On March 24 2011 05:07 freetgy wrote:
well that is not true actually. but the imbalance can be avoided if both sides do the imbalanced stuff...
that certainly doesn't mean it is not imbalanced.
Pretty sure if both sides can do the same thing, they can't be imbalanced. You know, definition of 'balance' and all that.
+ Show Spoiler [GSTL spoiler] +July proved that it's not the species, but the timings, and he absolutely stomped Slayers_Frozen for forge expanding.
|
Thanks OP, you really hit most of the reasons why MC won the finals. I feel it's a wasted exercise, though, as most people who couldn't understand it while watching it will not understand even in this spoon-fed format.
My only comment about the finals is that the more skilled, practiced, prepared and deserving player won, therefore we achieved the correct outcome.
On March 20 2011 15:44 confusedcrib wrote:In order to try and stifle the whines coming out from every SC2 player, I'm making this thread to actually analyze what happened each game, and how you can actually prevent it happening to you, and hopefully gather real analysis on the games from other players! Game One+ Show Spoiler +July opens speedling expand while MC opens with a 4 gate. His 4 gate is ingenious however because he cuts the first wave of units that you would make with a 4 gate to throw down an expansion. This delays his 4 gate for a small amount of time but he has the benefit of two gases and the mind game with his opponent. MC continues to cut probes as if doing a normal 2 gas 4 warp gate and then cancels his expo at the last second, gets one more round of units and rolls July First, had July scouted it, he would have been much better off. July never sacked an overlord in to see what protoss' production was, to his credit, this was the first time this has really been done and Zergs are not used to seeing it. MC won the scouting war because of the originality of the build, in the future it would most likely be scouted.
July did not begin making roaches until the 4 warp gate was half way across the map, and against a 2 gas 4 warp gate, since the push comes 2 minutes later than a 1 gas 4 warp gate, you need to use that extra time to pump roaches. Had July sacked an Overlord at the standard time and had 2 more rounds of production, he would have had 16 extra roaches and been able to easily hold MCs rush and win out in the macro game. Sentries were not the main factor in winning this game, the sentries were just there to convince the 3 gate expand. Had July seen what MC was doing he could have easily won. July opens speedling expand while MC opens 1 gate expand. This means that protoss gets his expo down before Zerg, which any player knows is not a good situation. At this point July has to choose between one base all inning and expanding at a disadvantaged position, he chooses the latter. MC is already far ahead as he did an extremely risky opening and July let it fly. Both players then macro up, it is a two basing protoss vs. a two basing Zerg and MC throws down a 5th and 6th gateway and begins to cut probes shortly thereafter. July then RUSHES hydralisks before even beginning roach burrow or speed. July then scouts a 6 gate and begins pumping roaches immediately, making his investment in the hydralisks worthless and his roach upgrades very delayed for no payoff. MC then attacks at the perfect timing before roach burrow is finished and the third base is finishing and easily takes the win. July rushed for hydralisks, delaying his roach burrow and speed too much. He also scouts the 6 gate too late to begin pumping roaches optimally. You'll notice the moment he scouts the 6 gate 11 roaches are produced and hydra range is canceled, this makes it clear that July is simply reacting as best as he can to a rush he didn't know was coming. Had July done the much more standard roach burrow timing to secure a third base, MCs lack of an observer would have meant a free infinite delay of MCs push, long enough for hydras to come in and easily take the game. The only thing FF did in game 2 was keep the roaches from kiting the 4 zealots of MC, if all of those sentries were other units, July would have still been rolled because of his mediocre roach timing against a perfect 6 wg timing. July opens speedling yet again and MC yet again gets a huge early advantage by getting an unpunished fast expand. MC takes back the economic advantage with an extremely fast third before lair, this allows MC's stargate to inflict some good damage before backing off. July then gets very fast hydralisks yet again, but MC, not expecting overlord drop to be upgraded, builds more cannons at the front and keeps his units there while July is able to Hydralisk drop into the main to secure a win before any colossus are out to deal with Hydras effectively. MC did a risky opener for not playing the colossus standard. MC did not give July a reason not to go pure hydra (i.e. colossus, storm, sometimes chargelots) and so July was able to win with it. MC let him go pure hydra and deserved to lose against it. Without a timing attack before hydras are out or a high tech unit, hydras will be dominant. July opens speedling while MC rushes for dark templar (he states in the interview afterwards that he had his practice partners preemptively get detection, indicating that this was not designed to win or be an all in). July is denied his overlord scout and most likely assumes a three warp gate expand. (Notice that this game July gets some preemptive roaches in case another fake expo 4 gate is coming). July sees the darks coming and immediately begins an evo chamber. July loses several roaches and a queen while MC loses nothing. MC begins blink and +1 attack while July takes a third, staying relatively even in economy with MC. July begins his hydra den a little bit later than what seems to be his standard based on the other games, but he does get his spire extremely quickly for a player not going mutaling. July frantically begins roach burrow and pumping roaches when he sees the high gateway unit count from MC. July engages blink +1 stalkers with pure - no burrow - roaches as his spire completes. July simply doesn't have enough to beat the timing push and gg's July could have easily taken this game as well but he seems to have a real problem with scouting his opponent. First he gets hydras and a spire, neither of which even come into play. Second, the counter to a +1 blink stalker build, similar to what Nazgul did against Idra, is either a lot of hydra's or Burrow roaches with equal upgrades, neither of which July had. Had July gotten faster hydras or committed more to roaches with burrow and tunneling claws he could have won, but instead teched in 2 useless directions against a well refined timing push that requires a very particular response. The FF that match stopped about 4 roaches from coming down the ramp and gave MC in total about 10 roaches. MC would have EASILY won without the sentries, the loss was purely July's fault for not reacting to his opponent. MCs build should also be given credit, as opening DT is a very cool way to do the blink stalker push without delaying it too much July speedling expands while MC forge fast expands without any counter pressure, this does put MC off to a starting advantage. July takes a risk though and gets a very fast third before lair. July is super droning, and looks to be off to a great start. MC again goes for the 6 gate play while again July rushes for Hydralisks instead of roach burrow. July begins roach hydra production but has not begun the critical hydra range upgrade yet. MC begins blink and +2 weapons. Hydralisks never get the plus range upgrade and MC slowly wins with upgraded wg units against severely under upgraded roach hydra. In the end it was MC with +3 weapon gateway units against +1 hydras off creep without range. I think that July felt very pressured that round, MC's aggressive army movement kept bating July's army off of creep and messed with July's mindset of upgrading and droning. MC made it look, through his superb army movement, like a 2 base all in was coming when really he had macro'd up and grabbed a third. Had July played a safer game and stayed on top of upgrades he would have easily won, but he really looked to be on tilt and unfocused. Again MC could have won without sentries or FF. Not to mention because July was engaging off creep without range, the hydras lack of speed was very easy to abuse. July simply was playing sloppy this last game and had he upgraded better he would have been easily able to win since MC never got colossus out. July made some very big mistakes, he didn't scout properly and teched too quickly (or not quickly enough) against builds that require very refined, precise timing to beat. His loss had little to nothing to do with FF or any other protoss goodness, but was purely based on how unrefined his play was. July knew the composition he wanted to have, but did not know how to get there. Also, what should be learned from this series are For Protoss: some very potent Protoss timings and how to do standard builds in interesting ways For Zerg: The importance of scouting and tech timings based upon that scouting.
|
On March 20 2011 16:17 MrBitter wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 16:13 Active.815 wrote: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? He's saying its not imba, and while they secured MC's victory they wouldnt've been necessary for him to win because of july's mistakes 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.
The rest of us? Most people are disagreeing with you, not sure what you were watching... Those FF's did not swing anything in MC's favour, he had those games secured and if those sentries were any other units he would have won anyway.
|
July proved that it's not the species, but the timings, and he absolutely stomped Slayers_Frozen for forge expanding.
He also killed MC when he forge expanded. July is pretty damn good at punishing risky builds.
|
On March 24 2011 05:10 Wren wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 05:07 freetgy wrote:
well that is not true actually. but the imbalance can be avoided if both sides do the imbalanced stuff...
that certainly doesn't mean it is not imbalanced. Pretty sure if both sides can do the same thing, they can't be imbalanced. You know, definition of 'balance' and all that. + Show Spoiler [GSTL spoiler] +July proved that it's not the species, but the timings, and he absolutely stomped Slayers_Frozen for forge expanding.
I have yet to see this game but it will be interesting to see him play a more punishing style, as in this series he let MC do whatever he wanted to
|
That's actually the key to the series. MC did whatever he wanted, regardless of July. He stepped up his deception to levels I'd not seen in the GSL before, but MC really just shoved his rushes down July's throat. It was a perfect mirror to his massively confident personality.
|
|
|
You ain't kidding, Losira's playing amazingly well right now. However, he's also not been faced with any of the rushes that won MC games.
|
On March 23 2011 15:49 lorkac wrote:
Why is that? Because Zerg don't all in. Why would Protoss or Terran ever worry about an early pool? They assume that it's just a different way for Zerg to macro up. They feel no pressure because it statistically never happens.
I agree - just not with the reason you give, which is that Zerg players are so unimaginative that they've never tried playing aggressively.
I just watched MrBitter play a game that illustrates the point beautifully. Terran 2-raxes, brings some marines and an SCV. Bitter holds it, just, with no economy loss other than that incurred by making lings. He could have lost, right there, if he'd mis-microed - but he didn't.
Terran pushes again with more marines. This time Bitter delays him while roaches pop and stops the attack. Again, it was a close thing and he nearly lost a vital queen - imagine Terran barracks had 100hp each and that's pretty much how vulnerable Zerg production is in the early game. Bitter advances on the Terran base, where there is still no expo, but can't get in because of the solid wall.
Next it's blueflame hellions, which manage to scoot by the forward roaches and cook a few drones before dying to more roaches and queens. Still nothing major accomplished, though.
Then Terran rolls in with four SCV-repaired Thors, with a fifth and sixth on the way. Could just as easily have been Banshees with cloak. They might even have been next on the menu if the Thors hadn't sealed the deal. There was no way Bitter could have seen which was coming, and it would be impossible to prepare for both.
At no point was Bitter even close to being able to put pressure back on his opponent. Literally his only chance to win that game would have come from surviving and denying the expo until the Terran mined out his main.
That is one-base aggression: throwing a hail of assorted shit at your opponent without a care in the world until he misses a beat and folds. If Zerg could do that, you can bet your ass they would be. And they do - or at least I do - in ZvZ. Maybe it's different elsewhere on the ladder but I really enjoy ZvZ: parrying lings and banelings with roaches, timing a roach/baneling attack on his speedling expand, feinting with mutas and then striking when he's blown gas on Hydra... it's short-bus stuff, no doubt, but fun because there isn't that insurmountable-seeming defender's advantage and ever-present threat of sudden unscouted game-ending tech making me huddle in my base fantasising about taking a third and getting a really big load of drones.
I'm sure you're right about Zerg players having a negative mentality. But that's because it's not been like playing Terran, where rushing for pretty much every imaginable tech has turned out to be an awesome strategy. "Let's try rushing for cloaked banshees - wow, he really can't deal with that, can he. Ok, blueflame hellion. Yep, that works. Let's try dropping them... yep, that works too. Reapers - ok, they're actually going to have to take that one off us because it's just too good. Let's do Vikings for a laugh; it can't possibly work, they can't even shoot air-to-ground.... hey look, he's supply-blocked. Ok, let's just rush one tech after another off one base... awesome!"
Don't get me wrong: I appreciate these builds have been really well refined and take skill to execute. But there's just so much that works. Compare that to Zerg's experience: "Ok, let's rush to... oh. He made marines/4-gated me so I'm dead. Guess I'll have to watch what he's doing, tech slowly and try to get ahead in economy." It's remarkable how often I see people on shows like the 12 weeks with the Pros saying "Ideally, you just want to do this with lings." It's like: "Yeah, lings are a bit samey after a while but at least you get a fuck of a lot of them."
I'm sure you're right: there will be great aggressive Zerg builds in there somewhere; builds that will give T and P pause. But they aren't the kind of big, obvious builds you get naturally channelled into, like 4-gate or 'Rush to X'. They'll be something that just seems stupid, like Ultra/Baneling vs mech, or something painfully precise like 'If you make exactly X drones, save Y larvae and build one spinecrawler at Z food, you can hold a 4-gate and punish a 3-gate expand.
|
Of course not. His opponents didn't have the luxury of just fiddling their thumbs as they wait for warpgate to finish. He applied pressure, forced mistakes, distracted his opponent's attention.
In other words, he didn't just sit there hoping the best.
|
On March 24 2011 10:09 Umpteen wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 15:49 lorkac wrote:
Why is that? Because Zerg don't all in. Why would Protoss or Terran ever worry about an early pool? They assume that it's just a different way for Zerg to macro up. They feel no pressure because it statistically never happens. I agree - just not with the reason you give, which is that Zerg players are so unimaginative that they've never tried playing aggressively. I just watched MrBitter play a game that illustrates the point beautifully. Terran 2-raxes, brings some marines and an SCV. Bitter holds it, just, with no economy loss other than that incurred by making lings. He could have lost, right there, if he'd mis-microed - but he didn't. Terran pushes again with more marines. This time Bitter delays him while roaches pop and stops the attack. Again, it was a close thing and he nearly lost a vital queen - imagine Terran barracks had 100hp each and that's pretty much how vulnerable Zerg production is in the early game. Bitter advances on the Terran base, where there is still no expo, but can't get in because of the solid wall. Next it's blueflame hellions, which manage to scoot by the forward roaches and cook a few drones before dying to more roaches and queens. Still nothing major accomplished, though. Then Terran rolls in with four SCV-repaired Thors, with a fifth and sixth on the way. Could just as easily have been Banshees with cloak. They might even have been next on the menu if the Thors hadn't sealed the deal. There was no way Bitter could have seen which was coming, and it would be impossible to prepare for both. At no point was Bitter even close to being able to put pressure back on his opponent. Literally his only chance to win that game would have come from surviving and denying the expo until the Terran mined out his main. That is one-base aggression: throwing a hail of assorted shit at your opponent without a care in the world until he misses a beat and folds. If Zerg could do that, you can bet your ass they would be. And they do - or at least I do - in ZvZ. Maybe it's different elsewhere on the ladder but I really enjoy ZvZ: parrying lings and banelings with roaches, timing a roach/baneling attack on his speedling expand, feinting with mutas and then striking when he's blown gas on Hydra... it's short-bus stuff, no doubt, but fun because there isn't that insurmountable defender's advantage and ever-present threat of sudden unscouted game-ending tech making me huddle in my base fantasising about taking a third and getting a really big load of drones. I'm sure you're right about Zerg players having a negative mentality. But that's because it's not been like playing Terran, where rushing for pretty much every imaginable tech has turned out to be an awesome strategy. "Let's try rushing for cloaked banshees - wow, he really can't deal with that, can he. Ok, blueflame hellion. Yep, that works. Let's try dropping them... yep, that works too. Reapers - ok, they're actually going to have to take that one off us because it's just too good. Let's do Vikings for a laugh; it can't possibly work, they can't even shoot air-to-ground.... hey look, he's supply-blocked. Ok, let's just rush one tech after another off one base... awesome!" Don't get me wrong: I appreciate these builds have been really well refined and take skill to execute. But there's just so much that works. Compare that to Zerg's experience: "Ok, let's rush to... oh. He made marines/4-gated me so I'm dead. Guess I'll have to watch what he's doing, tech slowly and try to get ahead in economy." It's remarkable how often I see people on shows like the 12 weeks with the Pros saying "Ideally, you just want to do this with lings." It's like: "Yeah, lings are a bit samey after a while but at least you get a fuck of a lot of them." I'm sure you're right: there will be great aggressive Zerg builds in there somewhere; builds that will give T and P pause. But they aren't the kind of big, obvious builds you get naturally channelled into, like 4-gate or 'Rush to X'. They'll be something that just seems stupid, like Ultra/Baneling vs mech.
it's too bad zerg's main form of midgame scouting isn't a detector that drops shapeshifters to allow him to scout 2-3 parts of the opponent's base at once. Otherwise, faking going mech with the blueflames hellions and not using the factories in favor of going banshees would be a stupid idea and people would know that blueflame hellions mean a techlabbed factory that doesn't have siege tech upgraded yet and hence the Terran is forced to make a Thor/scv all in with hellion support ala Boxer vs Zenio.
Yup yup, no way to see the thors coming. Nope.
|
Overseers are too late to detect any one-base pressure. So calling them midgame scouters is accurate to the point that it completely negates your point.
Also, how blind do you have to be not to notice that one of "your" units isn't under your control?
It's meaningless to see thors and SCVs coming when you're trying to rebound from constant pressure. You're already deep into crisis mode from the previous rushes, and even perfectly executed recovery isn't going to get you into a good position. A few thors being repaired are gonna do their damage: perfect preparation only allows for them to soften, rather than kill, you.
This sort of pressure is what you saw with Losira in a bunch of his games, they allowed him to keep the entirety of the combat at the other base. It's really hard to lose a game when you're constantly making stuff and using it to hit the other guy at his place. The difference between Zerg and Losira and any douche with Terran is that Zerg needs the economic advantage, while Terran (or Protoss) can pull it off on one-base. So if a Zerg is executing one of these high-economy builds into heavy-pressure (the only way that you can maintain the pressure), and a T or P is going for a rush (be it marines or hellions, or cloak banshees, or anything), the Terran or Protoss is going to be ready way faster.
|
On March 24 2011 12:35 Wren wrote:
Overseers are too late to detect any one-base pressure. So calling them midgame scouters is accurate to the point that it completely negates your point.
Also, how blind do you have to be not to notice that one of "your" units isn't under your control?
It's meaningless to see thors and SCVs coming when you're trying to rebound from constant pressure. You're already deep into crisis mode from the previous rushes, and even perfectly executed recovery isn't going to get you into a good position. A few thors being repaired are gonna do their damage: perfect preparation only allows for them to soften, rather than kill, you.
This sort of pressure is what you saw with Losira in a bunch of his games, they allowed him to keep the entirety of the combat at the other base. It's really hard to lose a game when you're constantly making stuff and using it to hit the other guy at his place. The difference between Zerg and Losira and any douche with Terran is that Zerg needs the economic advantage, while Terran (or Protoss) can pull it off on one-base. So if a Zerg is executing one of these high-economy builds into heavy-pressure (the only way that you can maintain the pressure), and a T or P is going for a rush (be it marines or hellions, or cloak banshees, or anything), the Terran or Protoss is going to be ready way faster.
Fine then. If I ever meet Losira I'll tell him he's a punk for being aggressive with zerg because zerg's only option is to 14hatch and whine if a 2rax shows up to apply pressure. I'll tell him Teamliquid doesn't believe his wins count because Zerg are only supposed to drone up and macro and never try more aggressive builds.
No problem man.
Oh, btw, Overseer is lair tech. The same tech you go after when going banelings/roaches in order for them to be fast enough to be actually useful against hellions/thors. Don't blame the race for the player's mistake of making too many drones and not teching enough.
|
That's clearly nothing of what I've been saying. I'm saying he's had great success at being aggressive and hasn't had to try to counter the most aggressive T/P builds.
That's right, overseer is lair tech, midgame.
|
Seems pretty obvious from first lines of OP text that he's heavily biased. What's the point in trying to say everything is balanced? Game is never completely balanced, and QQ about FF has a lot of ground. MC is great player, but I don't think he can win finals by that clear margin (only losing due to own mistake one game) if game is completely balanced.
|
On March 24 2011 14:12 Wren wrote:
That's clearly nothing of what I've been saying. I'm saying he's had great success at being aggressive and hasn't had to try to counter the most aggressive T/P builds.
That's right, overseer is lair tech, midgame.
So you're saying his wins don't really count that much because no one has 4gated him?
(Thor is mid-late game tech btw (which is lower than merely midgame tech), it's Mr. Bitter's fault he didn't keep up with upgrades)
|
On March 24 2011 14:21 Ouga wrote:
Seems pretty obvious from first lines of OP text that he's heavily biased. What's the point in trying to say everything is balanced? Game is never completely balanced, and QQ about FF has a lot of ground. MC is great player, but I don't think he can win finals by that clear margin (only losing due to own mistake one game) if game is completely balanced.
MC beating JulyZerg is not grounds for QQ about Forcefield. That's like QQing about Marines just because Boxer beat Kyrix.
|
On March 24 2011 14:40 lorkac wrote:
So you're saying his wins don't really count that much because no one has 4gated him?
Your deliberate slow-wittedness is growing old. I've been saying all along that Losira's style is both impressively successful and to be taken with a grain of salt because he hasn't shown counter to 4gate or 6gate.
|
On March 24 2011 15:11 Wren wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 14:40 lorkac wrote:
So you're saying his wins don't really count that much because no one has 4gated him? Your deliberate slow-wittedness is growing old. I've been saying all along that Losira's style is both impressively successful and to be taken with a grain of salt because he hasn't shown counter to 4gate or 6gate.
And your passive aggressive backhanded compliments are also elitist and insulting.
"I've been saying all along that Losira's style is both impressively successful"
Translation: He's pretty good.
"and to be taken with a grain of salt"
Translation: But really what I want to say is
"because he hasn't shown counter to 4gate or 6gate."
Translation: It doesn't count.
You see, someone who was actually impressed would see that in the current metagame the Macro Zergs are mostly losing, the aggressive zergs are winning.
Losira, Marrow, July...
The people who disagree with their success say backhanded compliments like "such and such was good, but until they beat a 4gate/SCV all-in I'm not really impressed"
Instead of seeing that a Protoss and Terran opponent will find it very risky to all-in against a person who is making a lot of dudes.
Let's put it this way. You're Protoss. You want to 4gate. Your probe arrives at the Zerg base and finds pool first; you continue the plan. The 2nd Probe arrives to check the hatch, nothing there, you run up the ramp and OMG WTF lots of Zerglings.
Do you risk doing an all in against someone who has a tonne of stuff? No, so you 3gate expand and hope Sentries allow you to survive. 4gate countered. Why? Because the opponent had dudes.
What happened when July stopped going heavy aggression? MC stomped his teeth on the curve and left nothing but a shattered tooth on the bike lane of the street.
|
Your example stopped one step too soon.
You're Protoss. You want to 4gate. Your probe arrives at the Zerg base and finds pool first; you continue the plan. The 2nd Probe arrives to check the hatch, nothing there, you run up the ramp and OMG WTF lots of Zerglings. Do you risk doing an all in against someone who has a tonne of stuff? No, so you 3gate expand and know that Sentries allow you to survive.
4gate countered, then immediately double countered. Protoss way ahead.
You also misinterpreted me again, continuing to completely miss the point. It's amazing how blind you've been to arguments presented. Losira's been awesome against people with economic openings and not had his tested even once. Every win counts, and an aggressive Zerg can be smashed, fairly easily.
|
On March 24 2011 15:34 Wren wrote:Your example stopped one step too soon. Show nested quote +You're Protoss. You want to 4gate. Your probe arrives at the Zerg base and finds pool first; you continue the plan. The 2nd Probe arrives to check the hatch, nothing there, you run up the ramp and OMG WTF lots of Zerglings. Do you risk doing an all in against someone who has a tonne of stuff? No, so you 3gate expand and know that Sentries allow you to survive. 4gate countered, then immediately double countered. Protoss way ahead. You also misinterpreted me again, continuing to completely miss the point. It's amazing how blind you've been to arguments presented. Losira's been awesome against people with economic openings and not had his tested even once. Every win counts, and an aggressive Zerg can be smashed, fairly easily.
Actually, it is hope that sentries allow you to survive.
If you've been noticing, these aggressive openings are punishing FE players the most. Sentries or no. The heavy aggro build forces a bad FE that is punished by the aggressive playstyle since the aggressive playstyle is most effective *against* a FE build. Their best hope is for one base play, in which case you've contained them and you can safely macro up.
Check and mate.
|
Sentry expand wasn't beaten by a single zerg rush all season. Sentries did hold zerglings off a number of times. Earlier in this thread, it was established beyond doubt that sentries stop zergling pressure.
False argument is false.
|
On March 24 2011 16:39 Wren wrote:
Sentry expand wasn't beaten by a single zerg rush all season. Sentries did hold zerglings off a number of times. Earlier in this thread, it was established beyond doubt that sentries stop zergling pressure.
False argument is false.
This thread opened with analysis of the MC v July games where MC would expand (fake or not) and July would do absolutely nothing about it.
July would go on to lose the games.
Did you watch those games?
Did you watch the Losira games?
Did you watch the JulyAnypro games?
Don't redirect because you have no argument.
(btw, the fact that this thread is already more than 15 pages shows that nothing was proven other than people who cried about forcefield are still crying about it)
|
(btw, the fact that this thread is already more than 15 pages shows that nothing was proven other than people who cried about forcefield are still crying about it)
It also shows a lot of very random and wrong comments. Mostly along the lines of:
Ive seen zergs all-in against risky FE builds like 1 gate FE, nexus first, and forge FE, and it worked really well. Thus, zergs should always all-in every game, and it doesnt matter if the opponent was going for a 3gate expand that is completely safe, because Ive seen pros 6 pool a forge FE on scrap station.
That seems to be the whole argument really.
On the one side:
People saying that zergs should all-in everygame against everything because its super effective!
On the other side:
People saying that hey, all-ins work super well against risky builds, but they dont work against safe builds, and will actually put you far behind there.
|
did anyone of you even watch a Losira Game? Losira is an incredible MACRO-Zerg. He can do a lot of builds, but usually he only goes aggressive when he is ahead. Every other attack is usually only to use a chance the opponent gives him to do (counter-)attacks.
You know why pro-Zergs dont play blind aggression? Because it doesnt work.
You know why pro-T/P play blind aggression against Zerg, because it simply works if you keep him blind.
You know why nonpro P/T players QQ about big maps being "soooo" Zerg favored, while all pros prove them wrong? Because safe builds on those maps get you behind. As Zerg doesnt have a safe build, you just play normal with them, while Terrans and Protoss have to learn that sometimes you have to risk a blind all-in of your opponent to get ahead. But all you want to do is bunker on 1base, then bunker on 2base and get your fancy army and A. and if it doesnt work because zerg has taken heavy risks and you didnt punish him because you never scouted you just decide to 1base all in next game because you have a garanteed 50% win chance, without ever having to scout.
Why should a Zerg all in against those bunkers? they're safe builds, you dont punish safe builds (lol)
Let's put it this way. You're Protoss. You want to 4gate. Your probe arrives at the Zerg base and finds pool first; you continue the plan. The 2nd Probe arrives to check the hatch, nothing there, you run up the ramp and OMG WTF lots of Zerglings.
means he doesnt have a lot of drones, an expansion or production capabilities. What can he do?
burrowed roaches, mutas, banelings. Whats good against roaches? equal amount of stalkers. whats good against mutas, 2/3 the amount of stalkers. Whats good against banelings? a unit that costs 125/50 has 160hp and only takes 25dmg from a unit that dies when it attacks and costs 50/25 a piece.
btw at least as Protoss you can start with "I want to 4gate this game", and with like 7 other offensive builds, where you have a good chance of winning (50+% if not scouted, 25% if scouted early enough) if he plays standard and you are ahead if he doesnt.
As Zerg you can 6pool. Everything else is reacting or very poor all-ins that lose against a wall-in.
btw. I dont think TvZ is imbalanced, you dont have a safe build, but terran cant dictate the game blindly.
Im not so sure about PvZ. You CAN hold everything of a Protoss throws at you. You just have to scout EVERY SINGLE TECH + PRODCUTION STRUCTURE early enough, while Protoss dont have to know everything about zerg.
|
On March 24 2011 10:18 lorkac wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 10:09 Umpteen wrote:On March 23 2011 15:49 lorkac wrote:
Why is that? Because Zerg don't all in. Why would Protoss or Terran ever worry about an early pool? They assume that it's just a different way for Zerg to macro up. They feel no pressure because it statistically never happens. I agree - just not with the reason you give, which is that Zerg players are so unimaginative that they've never tried playing aggressively. I just watched MrBitter play a game that illustrates the point beautifully. Terran 2-raxes, brings some marines and an SCV. Bitter holds it, just, with no economy loss other than that incurred by making lings. He could have lost, right there, if he'd mis-microed - but he didn't. Terran pushes again with more marines. This time Bitter delays him while roaches pop and stops the attack. Again, it was a close thing and he nearly lost a vital queen - imagine Terran barracks had 100hp each and that's pretty much how vulnerable Zerg production is in the early game. Bitter advances on the Terran base, where there is still no expo, but can't get in because of the solid wall. Next it's blueflame hellions, which manage to scoot by the forward roaches and cook a few drones before dying to more roaches and queens. Still nothing major accomplished, though. Then Terran rolls in with four SCV-repaired Thors, with a fifth and sixth on the way. Could just as easily have been Banshees with cloak. They might even have been next on the menu if the Thors hadn't sealed the deal. There was no way Bitter could have seen which was coming, and it would be impossible to prepare for both. At no point was Bitter even close to being able to put pressure back on his opponent. Literally his only chance to win that game would have come from surviving and denying the expo until the Terran mined out his main. That is one-base aggression: throwing a hail of assorted shit at your opponent without a care in the world until he misses a beat and folds. If Zerg could do that, you can bet your ass they would be. And they do - or at least I do - in ZvZ. Maybe it's different elsewhere on the ladder but I really enjoy ZvZ: parrying lings and banelings with roaches, timing a roach/baneling attack on his speedling expand, feinting with mutas and then striking when he's blown gas on Hydra... it's short-bus stuff, no doubt, but fun because there isn't that insurmountable defender's advantage and ever-present threat of sudden unscouted game-ending tech making me huddle in my base fantasising about taking a third and getting a really big load of drones. I'm sure you're right about Zerg players having a negative mentality. But that's because it's not been like playing Terran, where rushing for pretty much every imaginable tech has turned out to be an awesome strategy. "Let's try rushing for cloaked banshees - wow, he really can't deal with that, can he. Ok, blueflame hellion. Yep, that works. Let's try dropping them... yep, that works too. Reapers - ok, they're actually going to have to take that one off us because it's just too good. Let's do Vikings for a laugh; it can't possibly work, they can't even shoot air-to-ground.... hey look, he's supply-blocked. Ok, let's just rush one tech after another off one base... awesome!" Don't get me wrong: I appreciate these builds have been really well refined and take skill to execute. But there's just so much that works. Compare that to Zerg's experience: "Ok, let's rush to... oh. He made marines/4-gated me so I'm dead. Guess I'll have to watch what he's doing, tech slowly and try to get ahead in economy." It's remarkable how often I see people on shows like the 12 weeks with the Pros saying "Ideally, you just want to do this with lings." It's like: "Yeah, lings are a bit samey after a while but at least you get a fuck of a lot of them." I'm sure you're right: there will be great aggressive Zerg builds in there somewhere; builds that will give T and P pause. But they aren't the kind of big, obvious builds you get naturally channelled into, like 4-gate or 'Rush to X'. They'll be something that just seems stupid, like Ultra/Baneling vs mech. it's too bad zerg's main form of midgame scouting isn't a detector that drops shapeshifters to allow him to scout 2-3 parts of the opponent's base at once.
Ok, well, I've done my best to see things from your point of view, but you've finally convinced me you actually don't know what you're talking about, and are simply making sarcastic jibes to prop up your predetermined conclusion that Zerg players are bad. I know a lost cause when I see one.
Maybe Bitter should have Nydused his main - or used drops more, you think? Or burrowed some infestors to his mineral line perhaps. I'll mention that to him next time I'm in the chat.
|
On March 20 2011 20:01 CatNzHat wrote:
@^^ FF did win MC the last game, as did a few mistakes that the zerg made, had MC screwed up or made a large mistake, FF would allow him to nullify that mistake, as does chrono-boost in case you forget probes or whatnot. MC really showcased a player who doesn't need to abuse FF to win, but who chooses to anyways, the problem with FF and sentries is the lack of skill and the ammount of leeway you have with them, anyone diamond and above playing toss is about the same difficulty to beat as a top200 toss, they can just FF and stop the army, giving them time, perfect positioning, or whatever they're horrid at. The only way to really beat a toss player is to A:spawn as terran, get ghosts, and hope they don't split their sentries/immortals/templars if they go collosus it's possible to beat them, if they go templar first, then it's gg unless they suck, hardcore suck.
Also, did I mention toss knows exactly what zerg/terran are doing cuz they have obs....
I hope retards like you never post in the strategy forum, because you come in with the assumption that the game is imbalanced and all losses are attributed to game balance rather than personal skill.
The difference in forcefields between White Ra and MC, two top class players (and not top 200 garbage) was as evident as night and day in the TSL 3 matches. People like you have no clue about what constitutes skill and what constitutes mindless clicking. Terran stutter step is mindless clicking, forcefield usage on the other hand, requires excellent control, precision and knowledge of exact unit range and distances to maximize the efficiency of forcefields.
Please do a favor to others and never post such garbage about things which you have no clue about.
|
GSTL spoiler. Really sorry for forgeting the spoilers initially :S
+ Show Spoiler +Hey to all the "IMLosira can beat everything and is sooo good" out there, he just lost against SlayerS_Alica. He tried to banelingbust and all Alicia had was 1canon+1sentry, but he held. From there on Alicia was way way ahead and though Losira played well from there on, he had no chance coming back.
But hey, all zergs should all in all the time LOL.
|
who says Zerg should all in all the time...
it just retarded that Zerg should play macro all the time
Had july started out an aggressiv play like he usually does he wouldn't have died as badly as he did now.
|
Had july started out an aggressiv play like he usually does he wouldn't have died as badly as he did now.
First it is an assumption. Second he only had the chance for aggressive play in like 1game. (1gate expand) 3rd he tried to in that dt-game, but guess what, half way with his roaches he spoted the dts and had to turn around. And you cannot attack a 6gating protoss... he has all the chokes he wants to cut you into little pieces and keep on picking u apart...
|
Great analysis.
So tired of listning to whiners thinking everytime a player of their race (or them selves lol) loses a game its only because of imbalance.
|
So here I am at work, counting the minutes to get home and be able to watch the GSTL finale (still 3 more hours ffs), reading me some TL forum (yeah, it's slow at work atm...), when I came across this post...
I know the titel of the thread has "spoiler alert" in it, but also "GSL finale", not "gsTl finale", and since I saw the GSL finale, I thought reading this thread wouldn't be an issue...
+ Show Spoiler +On March 24 2011 19:06 Big J wrote:
Hey to all the "IMLosira can beat everything and is sooo good" out there, he just lost against SlayerS_Alica. He tried to banelingbust and all Alicia had was 1canon+1sentry, but he held. From there on Alicia was way way ahead and though Losira played well from there on, he had no chance coming back.
But hey, all zergs should all in all the time LOL.
^ GSTL finale spoiler
so yeah, thanks... a lot...
On a sidenote:
Sucks this had to be my 1st post, but there you go...
|
EXACTLY my thoughts after i saw Losira at GSTL ^^
|
+ Show Spoiler +On March 24 2011 19:06 Big J wrote:GSTL spoiler. Really sorry for forgeting the spoilers initially :S + Show Spoiler +Hey to all the "IMLosira can beat everything and is sooo good" out there, he just lost against SlayerS_Alica. He tried to banelingbust and all Alicia had was 1canon+1sentry, but he held. From there on Alicia was way way ahead and though Losira played well from there on, he had no chance coming back.
But hey, all zergs should all in all the time LOL. Gasp! That simply makes Losira's record against that (a lot)-1! Quickly folks, simply having a really good record is not enough, it's either flawless undefeated no mistakes whatsoever in any way shape or form OR DEATH! Seriously though, you sound like someone who flipped heads twice, and when you flipped tails the third time you've assumed that heads will never happen again. No strats are fullproof and SlayersAlicia is a good player.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On March 25 2011 00:15 lorkac wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On March 24 2011 19:06 Big J wrote:GSTL spoiler. Really sorry for forgeting the spoilers initially :S + Show Spoiler +Hey to all the "IMLosira can beat everything and is sooo good" out there, he just lost against SlayerS_Alica. He tried to banelingbust and all Alicia had was 1canon+1sentry, but he held. From there on Alicia was way way ahead and though Losira played well from there on, he had no chance coming back.
But hey, all zergs should all in all the time LOL. Gasp! That simply makes Losira's record against that (a lot)-1! Quickly folks, simply having a really good record is not enough, it's either flawless undefeated no mistakes whatsoever in any way shape or form OR DEATH! Seriously though, you sound like someone who flipped heads twice, and when you flipped tails the third time you've assumed that heads will never happen again. No strats are fullproof and SlayersAlicia is a good player. its not the amount of loses from Losira that bothers me. Its the fact that a lot of nonzergs say that "Losira will break this and that" and then the situation occurs, and he loses to 1sentry! Alicia had 1sentry and Losira pretty much lost right there, so I think this pretty much proofes our point: going offensive against a Protoss can just lose you the game, because if it fails, you just dont do ANY damage, while when you lose a small-medium push as Protoss like the 3gate expansion push, you force and kill at least a lot of zerglings and only get behind.
|
I will be doing a write up of the GSTL finals soon, maybe I can answer more questions
|
On March 25 2011 00:25 Big J wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On March 25 2011 00:15 lorkac wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On March 24 2011 19:06 Big J wrote:GSTL spoiler. Really sorry for forgeting the spoilers initially :S + Show Spoiler +Hey to all the "IMLosira can beat everything and is sooo good" out there, he just lost against SlayerS_Alica. He tried to banelingbust and all Alicia had was 1canon+1sentry, but he held. From there on Alicia was way way ahead and though Losira played well from there on, he had no chance coming back.
But hey, all zergs should all in all the time LOL. Gasp! That simply makes Losira's record against that (a lot)-1! Quickly folks, simply having a really good record is not enough, it's either flawless undefeated no mistakes whatsoever in any way shape or form OR DEATH! Seriously though, you sound like someone who flipped heads twice, and when you flipped tails the third time you've assumed that heads will never happen again. No strats are fullproof and SlayersAlicia is a good player. its not the amount of loses from Losira that bothers me. Its the fact that a lot of nonzergs say that "Losira will break this and that" and then the situation occurs, and he loses to 1sentry! Alicia had 1sentry and Losira pretty much lost right there, so I think this pretty much proofes our point: going offensive against a Protoss can just lose you the game, because if it fails, you just dont do ANY damage, while when you lose a small-medium push as Protoss like the 3gate expansion push, you force and kill at least a lot of zerglings and only get behind.
actually, the first time it happened Losira roflstomped LiquidHuk. Julyzerg also roflstomped slayersfrozen and july's one win against MC was because MC fast expanded (and That was when MC had about 6-7 sentries)
please try again.
|
sorry but your obvious trolling gets old.
You are just trying to proof your point of view by refering to exceptions.
There are much more examples of these tactics you mention simply not working or going terribly wrong than their successful execution.
You are basically saying "Jumping out of a plane without parachute is a very good way to get where you want without haveing to check out and call a taxi. My point is absolutely vaild because there are people who survived it!"
|
On March 25 2011 03:16 lorkac wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2011 00:25 Big J wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On March 25 2011 00:15 lorkac wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On March 24 2011 19:06 Big J wrote:GSTL spoiler. Really sorry for forgeting the spoilers initially :S + Show Spoiler +Hey to all the "IMLosira can beat everything and is sooo good" out there, he just lost against SlayerS_Alica. He tried to banelingbust and all Alicia had was 1canon+1sentry, but he held. From there on Alicia was way way ahead and though Losira played well from there on, he had no chance coming back.
But hey, all zergs should all in all the time LOL. Gasp! That simply makes Losira's record against that (a lot)-1! Quickly folks, simply having a really good record is not enough, it's either flawless undefeated no mistakes whatsoever in any way shape or form OR DEATH! Seriously though, you sound like someone who flipped heads twice, and when you flipped tails the third time you've assumed that heads will never happen again. No strats are fullproof and SlayersAlicia is a good player. its not the amount of loses from Losira that bothers me. Its the fact that a lot of nonzergs say that "Losira will break this and that" and then the situation occurs, and he loses to 1sentry! Alicia had 1sentry and Losira pretty much lost right there, so I think this pretty much proofes our point: going offensive against a Protoss can just lose you the game, because if it fails, you just dont do ANY damage, while when you lose a small-medium push as Protoss like the 3gate expansion push, you force and kill at least a lot of zerglings and only get behind. actually, the first time it happened Losira roflstomped LiquidHuk. Julyzerg also roflstomped slayersfrozen and july's one win against MC was because MC fast expanded (and That was when MC had about 6-7 sentries) please try again.
Im just gonna reply to what you wrote with quotes, as you obviously didnt read what I wrote, yet:
Zerg CAN do all-ins, but they are way weaker than T/Ps all-ins. they ONLY work if T or P takes a risk.
1base roach all in occurs against a NEXUS FIRST build. (some guy against HuK)
Banelings busting barracks occurs against CC FIRST builds. (JulyZerg)
2base Roach all-in occurs against Protoss 3gate expanding and then rushing for colossi.
Baneling busting down Protoss wall-in occured against Forge-fast expand into 1Gateway, Cybercore, double Stargate (Fruitdealer)
I just want to say:
ZvP isn't OP in a way because Zerg can react to everything Protoss does, but it's way harder to decide what to do and way more unforgiving to make mistakes.
because
going offensive against a Protoss can just lose you the game, because if it fails, you just dont do ANY damage, while when you lose a small-medium push as Protoss like the 3gate expansion push, you force and kill at least a lot of zerglings and only get behind.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On March 25 2011 00:25 Big J wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On March 25 2011 00:15 lorkac wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On March 24 2011 19:06 Big J wrote:GSTL spoiler. Really sorry for forgeting the spoilers initially :S + Show Spoiler +Hey to all the "IMLosira can beat everything and is sooo good" out there, he just lost against SlayerS_Alica. He tried to banelingbust and all Alicia had was 1canon+1sentry, but he held. From there on Alicia was way way ahead and though Losira played well from there on, he had no chance coming back.
But hey, all zergs should all in all the time LOL. Gasp! That simply makes Losira's record against that (a lot)-1! Quickly folks, simply having a really good record is not enough, it's either flawless undefeated no mistakes whatsoever in any way shape or form OR DEATH! Seriously though, you sound like someone who flipped heads twice, and when you flipped tails the third time you've assumed that heads will never happen again. No strats are fullproof and SlayersAlicia is a good player. its not the amount of loses from Losira that bothers me. Its the fact that a lot of nonzergs say that "Losira will break this and that" and then the situation occurs, and he loses to 1sentry! Alicia had 1sentry and Losira pretty much lost right there, so I think this pretty much proofes our point: going offensive against a Protoss can just lose you the game, because if it fails, you just dont do ANY damage, while when you lose a small-medium push as Protoss like the 3gate expansion push, you force and kill at least a lot of zerglings and only get behind. Finally watched that game. The failed bust revealed the entire protoss tech tree and allowed Losira to saturate 2 bases. Losira then goes on to mass a bunch of roaches versus the voidrays he knew was coming. Yup, busting was what caused the loss and not the building of roaches vs voidrays, totally man.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On March 25 2011 09:16 lorkac wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2011 00:25 Big J wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On March 25 2011 00:15 lorkac wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On March 24 2011 19:06 Big J wrote:GSTL spoiler. Really sorry for forgeting the spoilers initially :S + Show Spoiler +Hey to all the "IMLosira can beat everything and is sooo good" out there, he just lost against SlayerS_Alica. He tried to banelingbust and all Alicia had was 1canon+1sentry, but he held. From there on Alicia was way way ahead and though Losira played well from there on, he had no chance coming back.
But hey, all zergs should all in all the time LOL. Gasp! That simply makes Losira's record against that (a lot)-1! Quickly folks, simply having a really good record is not enough, it's either flawless undefeated no mistakes whatsoever in any way shape or form OR DEATH! Seriously though, you sound like someone who flipped heads twice, and when you flipped tails the third time you've assumed that heads will never happen again. No strats are fullproof and SlayersAlicia is a good player. its not the amount of loses from Losira that bothers me. Its the fact that a lot of nonzergs say that "Losira will break this and that" and then the situation occurs, and he loses to 1sentry! Alicia had 1sentry and Losira pretty much lost right there, so I think this pretty much proofes our point: going offensive against a Protoss can just lose you the game, because if it fails, you just dont do ANY damage, while when you lose a small-medium push as Protoss like the 3gate expansion push, you force and kill at least a lot of zerglings and only get behind. Finally watched that game. The failed bust revealed the entire protoss tech tree and allowed Losira to saturate 2 bases. Losira then goes on to mass a bunch of roaches versus the voidrays he knew was coming. Yup, busting was what caused the loss and not the building of roaches vs voidrays, totally man. Yeah, he should have made his T1 Hydras instead, without the lair he didnt had because he needed his gas for the baneling bust... HE COULD ONLY MAKE ROACHES, ZERGLINGS AND BANELINGSbut I guess Losira didnt know that roaches cant shoot air, maybe it was his first game... so to sum up his choices: 1) making any of these makes you go: he made the wrong units 2) making drones make you go: he was a greedy macro zerg, and just didnt have anything 3) not busting make you go: he should have busted the wall and he would have "easily" taken the game but hey, ofc you are better than Losira, you would have held that voidray attack easily without the right tech for it
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
