EPTIdra vs. Cruncher Summary and Analysis (Spoilers) - Page 2
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
hugman
Sweden4644 Posts
| ||
|
7mk
Germany10157 Posts
2. Hit with the pure corrupter reload as soon as possible, rather than defensively when toss is in your base line. what? the first encounter was near Protoss' base, then idra uilt his reload but protoss army was already at his doorstep when the corrupter reload came how could he have gotten that so much sooner, I dont get that point at all. I havent been playing SC2 in a while but what I generally dont get is why Z doesnt use infestors against this. I'm sure they die very fast to vrays and colossi but as long as you get off just a few fungals it should be worth it | ||
confusedcrib
United States1307 Posts
On March 29 2011 07:50 dani` wrote: I stopped after reading your Game 1 description. You say you will to some objective recap, but the only thing I saw was "Idra did X beautifully, Idra did Y perfectly, ...". You might have the best analysis out there and I am sorry for skipping that but you do not seem objective at all here, as I see other people have noticed as well  Alright in game one analysis, I added a section all for cruncher, and at the bottom of my post I address these bias claims. | ||
|
confusedcrib
United States1307 Posts
On March 29 2011 07:58 7mk wrote: what? the first encounter was near Protoss' base, then idra uilt his reload but protoss army was already at his doorstep when the corrupter reload came how could he have gotten that so much sooner, I dont get that point at all. I havent been playing SC2 in a while but what I generally dont get is why Z doesnt use infestors against this. I'm sure they die very fast to vrays and colossi but as long as you get off just a few fungals it should be worth it Let me clarify: Idra has a max army, attacks, reloads on almost pure corrupter, attacks again, reloads on lings, and attacks again. My point was that the pure corrupter reload should have been more aggressive. | ||
|
TehForce
1072 Posts
Idra chose the 100% macro mode option and was punished for it. | ||
|
TehForce
1072 Posts
On March 29 2011 08:00 confusedcrib wrote: Let me clarify: Idra has a max army, attacks, reloads on almost pure corrupter, attacks again, reloads on lings, and attacks again. My point was that the pure corrupter reload should have been more aggressive. The problem was that the RELOAD was only corrupter. The first army should have been mostly corrupters, not the reload. | ||
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On March 29 2011 07:26 DoubleReed wrote: Even with the large corruptor numbers he had, Cruncher still had two colossi left at the end. I doubt hydras and lings would have been effective. Personally, I'm still at a loss to what beats void rays in those numbers in any sort of reasonable way. Maybe Infestors would be better? Man the Protoss deathball is scary as hell. Can someone show me a game of someone beating VR/Colossus effectively without the drop/timing attack? Also, in game 1 compared to game 2, I doubt the dropping would have been as effective on shakuras. But it may still have worked. He wasn't focus firing down colossi, he had his corrupters attacking void rays a lot of the time. He also threw away a lot of corrupters against a fleet of void rays right before protoss moved out, instead of using them against the colossi, which is what they are for. Also, Zergling/hydra is a better remax against stalker/void ray. Have a few corrupters go around to intercept colossi reinforcements. The gist is, IdrA waited for Cruncher to push out. You should never do that when you're up 4 bases -_-. | ||
|
mastergriggy
United States1312 Posts
G1: Idra didn't take advantage of his extra bases. If he had just traded armies (or killed some of the Protoss army), he had more than enough resources to macro up a new one. He didn't do this and he lost. Cruncher macroed up a ball of death, and just pushed in and won. Simple as that. G2: Idra played well and thought outside of the box. He combined drops as well as splitting up his army to completely overwhelm Cruncher. Cruncher, I'm guessing from lack of experience, couldn't keep up with every place at once. G3: Idra was greedy first with his outside base expansion, and second made 7 drones when he should have made roaches. Cruncher kept Idra from scouting and knowing what was going on, and stream rolled him with a 6 gate. | ||
|
citi.zen
2509 Posts
On March 29 2011 07:23 Morphs wrote: IdrA's dropplay in game 2 was simply phenomenal. Extreme amounts of apm and mirco to pull all that off. His new playstyle is simply awesome. I think zerg will be providing more crazy strats in the future. CrunCher had an impressive opening with the void + phoenixes combo, nasty harrass that is.. I am not even convinced it takes THAT high of an APM to be aggressive. Look at Mondragon's games against similar openings. Solid strategy goes a long way and better players always find a way to at some point control the flow of the game. Idra did it in game 2 but in games 1 and 3 seemed totally lost. | ||
|
rsvp
United States2266 Posts
On March 29 2011 07:48 confusedcrib wrote: I always focus on the losing player, as that is where the analysis of how to win can happen. False. Idra won game 2, and you still focused on him. On March 29 2011 07:48 confusedcrib wrote: Anyone can look at Cruncher and go, that's a good build, and learn how to do it just by watching, but the real analysis is focused on Idra's loss and how to beat the void colossus style. If you want to learn how Cruncher won you can just watch it yourself, that doesn't need analysis. This is what bias is. You don't even realize any of the little things Cruncher is doing. And trust me, his builds were well thought out, and he practiced specifically against Idra's style. There is a ton of analysis that can be done on Cruncher's play, and to say that it doesn't need analysis just demonstrates your ignorance. On March 29 2011 07:48 confusedcrib wrote: In the game Cruncher lost, I thought I made it clear that this was a build order type of loss where Cruncher just doesn't get colossus up fast, that an inherent risk in the build. Drop play is indeed very effective against Cruncher's style of play in game 2, but it is not a simple build order loss. There are things Cruncher could have done better to defend it. Also, what do you mean he didnt' get colossus up fast, he got a colossus out in time to defend the drop. Look, I have no problem with your actual analysis even before you made any changes to it, but you should take out your preface, because all your claims about being objective and how this is purely an analysis just isn't fair at all. It's really hard to take you seriously otherwise (especially since you don't even have any credentials). | ||
|
Silmakuoppaanikinko
799 Posts
Dude, it sounds like you analyse this from IdrA's stream, the only time you mention Crunch is when IdrA has vision of him. It's not even the fact that you praise him a lot more, but that you only mention Crunch in the instances where IdrA has vision of him. | ||
|
Charon1979
Austria317 Posts
I don't know how seriously I can look at a strategic analysis of a game with this level of bias towards Idra. Not to say that there is anything wrong with having a favorite player, but as far as analysis goes, I can't objectively read your summary with this much bias without thinking that you are making indirect comments about balance. G1: Idra didn't take advantage of his extra bases. If he had just traded armies (or killed some of the Protoss army), he had more than enough resources to macro up a new one. He didn't do this and he lost. Cruncher macroed up a ball of death, and just pushed in and won. Simple as that. G2: Idra played well and thought outside of the box. He combined drops as well as splitting up his army to completely overwhelm Cruncher. Cruncher, I'm guessing from lack of experience, couldn't keep up with every place at once. G3: Idra was greedy first with his outside base expansion, and second made 7 drones when he should have made roaches. Cruncher kept Idra from scouting and knowing what was going on, and stream rolled him with a 6 gate. TBH your "analysis" is even more "making indirect comments about balance". It reads like: Game 1 IdrA was ahead unit/upgrade/econwise (which is fact) and had not enough of unit type X (read: corruptors) in the first engagement. Cruncher bunkered up, got 200/200 and a-moved.... hard to make a mistake here Game 2 It took IdrA an enormous amount of APM and multitasking to stop Cruncher from bunkering up, getting to 200/200 and a-move Game 3 IdrA was as greedy as Cruncher, but Cruncher doesnt have to scout and denied IdrAs Scout, game over. Crunchers "style" is not hard to pull off in ladder. Maybe you can lern a few timings from here or how easy it is to deny scouting and then just roflstomp the zerg. IdrAs game 2 style which was "outside the box" is a "little bit" harder to pull of than bunker, wait for 200/200 -> gg | ||
|
Frozenserpent
United States143 Posts
On March 29 2011 08:07 mastergriggy wrote: I don't know how seriously I can look at a strategic analysis of a game with this level of bias towards Idra. Not to say that there is anything wrong with having a favorite player, but as far as analysis goes, I can't objectively read your summary with this much bias without thinking that you are making indirect comments about balance. G1: Idra didn't take advantage of his extra bases. If he had just traded armies (or killed some of the Protoss army), he had more than enough resources to macro up a new one. He didn't do this and he lost. What do you think he was trying to do? He lost his entire army and remaxed. The issue was that the remax doesn't happen quick enough, the first army didn't kill enough, and the second army isn't strong enough to stop the ball. When people complain about dealing with the deathball, the issue is that you can't effectively trade units once the deathball is mature. Furthermore, you can't mine faster than 3 saturated mining bases without investing too much of your supply into workers. Any more bases than that doesn't help your overall income, but it does allow you mine gas faster. So that analysis is clueless and totally useless. G2: Idra played well and thought outside of the box. He combined drops as well as splitting up his army to completely overwhelm Cruncher. Cruncher, I'm guessing from lack of experience, couldn't keep up with every place at once. Hydra drop timing is quite strong against Protoss when they've expanded. This is the time zerg is the strongest compared to Protoss. I G3: Idra was greedy first with his outside base expansion, and second made 7 drones when he should have made roaches. Cruncher kept Idra from scouting and knowing what was going on, and stream rolled him with a 6 gate. People see the 7 drones Idra made and don't understand why he made it. One big issue is that Idra was preparing a bit for a 4-gate, early on. It's not possible to defend against a well-executed 4-gate without cutting into economy quite a bit. However Cruncher didn't 4-gate idra, so that left him with an econ lead over idra. Instead, he expands. Idra has two choices when the units move out. If it's a 6-gate all-in, he should do well to pump out as many units as possible. However, since his econ isn't that great, a successful defense isn't going to win him the game, even though 6-gate is considered all-in. If it's not a 6-gate all-in, then making a lot of units put idra into an all-in. As in, he'll have to wipe out a mineral line or destroy an expansion in order to get back. That's quite hard to do against 2-base toss after a certain timing window. So against non 6-gate, idra would want to macro up. I think people give analysis that is a bit focused on the wrong aspect. People are looking at game 3 and looking for decisions that will let you not die. Not dying, however, is not the same as winning. Econ-ing up offers a good chance for Idra to win. Cranking out a ton of units has a possibility of working if you get a favorable battle against protoss, but it is quite all-in, and depends heavily on your opponent being able to defend it or not. So from idra's perspective, making the drones had a better chance of winning than pumping roaches. | ||
|
confusedcrib
United States1307 Posts
On March 29 2011 08:22 Anihc wrote: False. Idra won game 2, and you still focused on him. This is what bias is. You don't even realize any of the little things Cruncher is doing. And trust me, his builds were well thought out, and he practiced specifically against Idra's style. There is a ton of analysis that can be done on Cruncher's play, and to say that it doesn't need analysis just demonstrates your ignorance. Drop play is indeed very effective against Cruncher's style of play in game 2, but it is not a simple build order loss. There are things Cruncher could have done better to defend it. Also, what do you mean he didnt' get colossus up fast, he got a colossus out in time to defend the drop. Look, I have no problem with your actual analysis even before you made any changes to it, but you should take out your preface, because all your claims about being objective and how this is purely an analysis just isn't fair at all. It's really hard to take you seriously otherwise (especially since you don't even have any credentials). I think we are mis-communicating our ideas of bias. My idea of bias is when I make excuses for one player or complain about balance, but I think for you it might be simply analyzing one player more than another. I don't really know what is wrong about focusing on one player more than another, we are just mis-communicating on our ideas of bias. I can focus on one player but still be objective I think. I'm really getting tired of your unnecessary comments that try and derail me, if I type up multiple 2000+ word analysis, I obviously care about this game and would like to improve my analysis as much as possible, and I think I deserve a little respect for that. In the future I will focus more on both players, but you have to realize that this requires even more time and effort, but if people think that it is worth it than I will do it. | ||
|
Jotoco
Brazil1342 Posts
I still think Mutas are better option against VR/Colo, but Shakuras (old one, at least) doesn't really help. The map is NOT good for zerg against P. The last game, though, I think it was a little bit of poor decision by Idra, but then, ForceFields shouldn't make units not able to attack, this is a bug and should be fixed. If the roaches could attack, even though they were forcefielded, I think they would have taken 1 or 2 extra sentries, and it could change the outcome of the game drastically. EDIT: TO be fair, though, Confusedcrib seems a little LESS partial then before. And his analysis is somewhat better, though there are many who are better than him. | ||
|
kasumimi
Greece460 Posts
For some reason people consider IdrA to be a hero, a representative of what a top-class player is made of, which in my opinion has nothing to do with reality. He only has 2 achievements to back up that reputation (1place MLG, 2nd IEM) and those were quite some time ago. His style hasn't evolved at all and no, having good creep spread in a macro game with 0 battles doesn't mean you're evolving. This thread is trying to analyze something that is not worth analyzing in the first place. IdrA played extremely passive in G1 and made too many drones in G3 and inevitably lost to Cruncher who player better. Cruncher played a solid game but that doesn't seem to matter, we are all trying to figure out how did this huge upset happen. It's not an upset, IdrA is overrated and can't keep up anymore with an evolving game. And those are the facts talking, not me. He is plagued by "silly" losses, games that he falls apart, but no-one seems to notice them, they are all an "upset" or a "bad day" or "imbalance" etc. This thread will lead nowhere but to subtle conclusions that P is proken while obscuring IdrA's poor play once again. And by the way I'm not an IdrA hater, I've been following his game since early beta and learned a lot by his style. It's just that his performance has been poor for so long (since the losses during GSL2) yet everyone treats him like the indestructible god of what was 1 year ago. Edit: Syntax, grammar, spelling fail | ||
|
done
Germany70 Posts
What I dont understand, is why some other posters (and blue ones at that feel the need to talk down to people taking a huge effort like that. If you see things differantly, please be so kind to let us hear your wisdom. If you dont, then keep quiet. But whatever your feelings are, why would you try and take down the OP's effort? Especially without even trying to state what part of the analysis they see differantly and without any reason seemingly other than to talk down to the OP and let him look like a noob? Seriously, if that is your idea of posting here to help the community, I hope you refrain from posting here in the future, no matter how blue your post may be. Arrogant attitude does not need to fill every thread on tl. | ||
|
ntrz
United States57 Posts
On March 29 2011 06:45 confusedcrib wrote: Cruncher is able to dominate what few roaches Idra has out with excellent forcefields and take the game, with a friendly, non sarcastic, non manner smiley face to boot. wait are you serious? you think cruncher giving idra a smiley face after beating him 2-1, is BM after idra told the world he was preparing for cruncher as if it was a "walkover" not saying "glhf" in either game2 or game3, and not gging in all 3 games? idra fanboys are some of the most unobjective people i've ever seen. | ||
|
Alphasquad
Austria505 Posts
On March 29 2011 08:40 Jotoco wrote: The strange thing is that confusedcrib was bashing Idra (and zergs in general) in his thread about FF a week ago. Now he is firmly in the zerg point of view. I still think Mutas are better option against VR/Colo, but Shakuras (old one, at least) doesn't really help. The map is NOT good for zerg against P. The last game, though, I think it was a little bit of poor decision by Idra, but then, ForceFields shouldn't make units not able to attack, this is a bug and should be fixed. If the roaches could attack, even though they were forcefielded, I think they would have taken 1 or 2 extra sentries, and it could change the outcome of the game drastically. EDIT: TO be fair, though, Confusedcrib seems a little LESS partial then before. And his analysis is somewhat better, though there are many who are better than him. i agree pretty much even when people say shakuras is a zerg map but i seriously dont see why as protoss are able to get their fastest possible expansion strat out there and since the rocks are gone you cant even rush anymore; on other maps protoss at least needs sentries but here a simple forge expand can be done while delaying the zerg expo - on which other map protoss can do that?i dont remind ever loosing a game against forge expands on any other map though i dont know how many times idra must have to loose the same way until he might start to change his strategies | ||
|
CrAzEdMiKe
Canada151 Posts
On March 29 2011 08:57 kasumimi wrote: + Show Spoiler + This thread is quite interesting and the posts by Anihc give a completely different depth to it. For some reason people consider IdrA to be a hero, a representative of what a top-class player is made of, which in my opinion has nothing to do with reality. He only has 2 achievements to back up that reputation (1place MLG, 2nd IEM) and those were quite some time ago. His style hasn't evolved at all and no, having good creep spread in a macro game with 0 battles doesn't mean you're evolving. This thread is trying to analyze something that is not worth analyzing in the first place. IdrA played extremely passive in G1 and made too many drones in G3 and inevitably lost to Cruncher who player better. Cruncher played a solid game but that doesn't seem to matter, we are all trying to figure out how did this huge upset happen. It's not an upset, IdrA is overrated and can't keep up anymore with an evolving game. And those are the facts talking, not me. He is plagued by "silly" losses, games that he falls apart, but no-one seems to notice them, they are all an "upset" or a "bad day" or "imbalance" etc. This thread will lead nowhere but to subtle conclusions that P is proken while obscuring IdrA's poor play once again. And by the way I'm not an IdrA hater, I've been following his game since early beta and learned a lot by his style. It's just that his performance has been poor for so long (since he losses during GSL2) yet everyone treats him like the indestructible god of what was 1 year ago. Edit: Syntax, grammar, spelling fail I'm by no means a pro level player (heck, I'm not even a diamond level player yet) but I feel I must agree with pretty much everything you've said. I'll be honest, I am quite a bit biased against IdrA simply because he is sooooooooo predictable and is frequently bad mannered. People often need to make a point about when he is being good mannered (and gee... those games are often where he is winning). But I digress. Again, I feel that he is just way too predictable and it amazes me that the other pro players don't try and punish this more. IdrA is obviously a very good player with excellent macro and he makes some very good decisions, but he is one dimensional. He will never be like TLO because he is super predictable and goes for the exact same strategy over and over and over again. I feel like this is holding him back as a player, since I've seen all too often where he gets rolled by an "odd timing attack" as some people have put it. I bet you that those "odd timing attacks" were a decision made by these top level players because they go "Hey... This is IdrA, he is droning up right now and won't expect this." As for the bias in this analysis... I don't think it was so much of a literal bias like that of an IdrA fanboy, but more that I never actually knew what was going on with Cruncher. It's easy to call it the Protoss Deathball... But often each Deathball is tailored for what it will be fighting. I understand that IdrA was the reactionary player and most of the focus will be on his decisions as Cruncher was going strategy A and IdrA had to choose how do deal with it... But that being said, it really did feel like I was watching a replay from IdrA's first person cam. An analysis of the game as a whole should try and encompass both players a little more instead of simply focusing on just one. Again, I will totally admit that I really don't like IdrA. I think he is way too cocky (regardless of what tournaments he has/hasn't won). If he was truly dedicated to E-Sports he would shape up his attitude, because yes you will find the trash talkers and the brawlers in professional sports... But more often than not the players on each team will treat eachother with respect because they realize "Hey, it took a lot of work and dedication for you to get here to play with me." and that usually gives a mutual respect. I personally don't like that IdrA will be involved with the NASL. He's a great player yes, but if the idea of the NASL is to really get E-Sports started in North America, I'm not sure using IdrA as your poster boy is a good move. I'm honestly less inclined to watch it just because I'll be seeing IdrA play more often and I'll have to watch his obnoxious BM/flaming/whining about "imbalance". I've definitely wandered off topic here and my apologies. Again, I'll say it flat out that I really don't like IdrA, so I am definitely very biased in this post and if you don't agree with me, it's all good because we can agree to disagree. But that being said, I'm super glad Cruncher won. Especially because he's a Protoss. Props Cruncher. | ||
| ||
