|
Again, I apologize for derailing the thread but the OP's claims of objective analysis are absolutely ridiculous and I felt the need to call him out on that. And yes I see those small changes you're making to the OP, but they're only making it worse.
But enough of that, here are my thoughts about the analysis:
Game 1
+ Show Spoiler +
- I have to disagree with you here that Idra could have won at several points of the game. Cruncher played it very safe, and knew that this was a good map to get 3 easy defendable bases with. You mentioned the fast colossus which is 1 element of it, but there are many more - for example, the fast stargate is great because the quick void allows for defense against 2 base roach attacks, while the following phoenixes allows for easy scouting and defense against the possibility of mutas. The intent of the stargate was not actually harass (harass is just a bonus), but mainly just for defense and superb scouting so he knows it's safe to continue on with his 3 base plan.
- I also don't necessarily agree with the statement that Cruncher plays an "immobile" style. Having a colossus ball is standard, so you might as well say that Zerg is more mobile than Protoss in general. It's not really a downside to this particular build. The only things that are more mobile than that are blink stalkers or heavy air play, both of which are not very common.
- I do agree with you that Idra did a superb job early-mid game in macroing, creep spreading, and scouting. He was able to enter the late game with a clear advantage. However, you should note that Idra having many more drones over Cruncher is not just because Idra's macro is good - Cruncher actually stopped making probes to save supply for more army. Gas was the limiting factor in his 3 base build, so additional probes were useless (and actually detrimental).
- You're completely right in that Idra should have full on engaged with his 200/200 army as soon as he got it, and then remaxed on mostly corruptor (and follow it with roach and other ground after colossus and corruptor are dead). Idra kinda wavered a bit with indecision and not knowing where to attack, slowly losing his advantage, and then threw it all away with the poor decision to attack pure void ray with pure corrupter.
Game 2
+ Show Spoiler +
- A mid-game hydra drop is indeed the counter to Cruncher's build, and Idra executed it flawlessly. Knowing that Cruncher was going to repeat his strategy from game 1, Idra went pure drones for the first half of the game allowing him to have that lopsided supply advantage over Cruncher, who actually IMO played it too safe (early on he cut probes to get up cannon/nexus, he also sent a 2nd probe to scout for 6 pool - lol). You have the right idea when you say that he abused the late colossus timing, but he got it out pretty fast considering he got out a stargate before the colossus. In fact, he got it out at the perfect timing - in time to defend against the drop. Unfortunately, Idra just had way too much and was able to deal a lot of damage with the first drop.
- The game was over as soon as Cruncher pulled his probes to defend against the first drop and lost all of his probes in his main. This was a questionable decision, as he may have been able to hold off the drop without pulling probes. But even if he did, Idra still made the really smart move of dropping 4 hydras behind the mineral line of the main while the main drop was going on. Cruncher was going to lose probes no matter what.
- Idra shows off his strength in multitasking as he's able to drop everywhere while still keeping up his macro and even getting a 4th base. But what you say about "imagine if Idra had done this multi pronged attack with his maxed army in game 1" doesn't make sense. With a mid-game drop, Idra is able to abuse the fact that Cruncher has spent all his money on tech and cannons at this front, and had very few units. If he waited for 200/200, drops would not have worked because then he would have had to deal with an actual protoss ball. He won because of excellent timing, and he knew this was when the Protoss was at its weakest. Also what you say about Zerg droning and still being aggressive doesn't make sense either, because those 2 things did not happen at the same time. Idra droned up, then switched completely to being aggressive.
Game 3
+ Show Spoiler +
- Not much to analyze here, and you're right that Idra making those 7 drones was pretty much his downfall. Although he could have done things to minimize the effects of forcefields such as baiting with smaller groups of units, engaging farther away from his base, and/or spreading out his units.
- It might be interesting to note the mind games here. Idra comes into this matchup expecting 2 4 gates from Cruncher. What he got instead was 2 macro games. Now it's game 3, and Idra must decide whether Cruncher will do what he's best at (or at least what Idra thinks he's best at), which is all-ining, or if he'll try macro again. Idra again opts to be greedy and that leads to his downfall like it has many many times in the past.
|
On March 29 2011 09:19 ntrz wrote:Show nested quote +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.
I mention Idra's lack of a gg in my first game analysis, I don't understand why this is the issue everyone focuses on rather than the analysis itself
|
I thought you did fine for what your goal was, focusing on the losing player's perspective. Some people seem to be favoring Cruncher and offended that you'd ever analyze the play of a losing player who plays zerg and BMs and then proceed to point out the things he did right.
|
I think what is not given enough credit for idra's game two is his transition into roach corrupter while he kept expanding and doing some limited droning.
|
Now, I don't want to belittle Cruncher as I don't know him too much as a player much more than what I've seen during the game, and you can only be disappointed by the outcome of the series. It might be the Zerg bias, but by all means, I'm not a fan of Idra.
To me, it doesn't really matter that he lacked manners against his opponent. It's true, he might need to revise his strategy economically, but it's disappointing to see a player that puts this amount of dedication lose against a semi professional (I can only assume he is.). Those things weren't happening in Brood War. I don't you know if it's because the Professional aren't getting what the game is all about just yet, or that they just don't see all of the possibilities, but things need to be worked out.
Losing both IdrA and Nestea is also rather tragic on Zerg point of view.
|
On March 29 2011 12:53 confusedcrib wrote:
I think what is not given enough credit for idra's game two is his transition into roach corrupter while he kept expanding and doing some limited droning.
He won after the first drop killed all of Cruncher's probes in his main. There is nothing special about transitioning to corruptors and roaches to counter colossus.
|
On March 29 2011 07:00 Anihc wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2011 06:45 confusedcrib wrote:
I know that these games are still full of emotion for fans of every player, but try and think of these games objectively. It's made even worse by the fact that Idra is extremely vocal about his feelings on the game, but this analysis is just that, an analysis, and shouldn't be taken as saying who deserved to win.
Wait are you serious? I can't tell if you're trolling/being sarcastic but your game analysis is extremely biased and you made it painfully obvious that you thought Idra deserved to win.
Pretty much, all I read in every sentence was "i love idra i love idra I love idra i love idra"
This is about as far from an objective analysis as you can get.
|
You know what I like.
I like that of all the Zerg who played in the TSL's round of 32, the two that got through was the baneling buster and the macro zerg who built lots of spines.
Sorry Idra.
|
If only Idra learned the composition that crushes Void-Ray Colossus, he would have annihilated this guy.
It is Muck's build, but everybody ignored it.
|
On March 29 2011 08:24 Silmakuoppaanikinko wrote:
"Idra does this and sees that cruncher does that, idra reacts in this way, idra does such and that."
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.
The builds Cruncher did are pretty linear and you don't need to react to a lot of things while doing them (Build your ball on a set number of base and push at a set timing). It is almost pointless to have the view of Cruncher, except maybe for some unit placement decisions.
|
On March 29 2011 10:09 CrAzEdMiKe wrote:
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 guess you must have missed game two. Because after that game you can not say that IdrA always does the same thing. I would say he responded perfectly to what he saw in game 1 and adapted to Cruncher's strategy beautifully.
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 a Z player I can tell you that the droning up decision by IdrA was right 95% of the time. What did he see coming out of the base? zealot, sentry. In the majority of the time that happens it is actually a fake by the P baiting you into units. You make drones - he kills you. You make units and he attacks, he runs away with forcefields to protect and kills you later cause you are behind.
And the FF's were beautiful but I think blizz should fix that such that you can not have more units in the small space where less units would fit. Just move the 'extra' units behind the FFs (probably hard to implement)
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.
I still do not know how you deal with that deathball. What kills 15 voids + 4 colossus as zerg with FFs in patch 1.2? Nothing really.
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.
And as a Z player after round of 32, seeing Z go 3-6 I have to wonder wth? Small sample I know but still. And who went through - morrow who baneling busted (great choice vs 14 CC, but I still don't understand why Jinro went 144CC in game 3 after losing 1), Mondragon who actually did an awesome job vs. a stargate opening (I need to watch those games again to try and incorporate that in my play) and Sen's whose games I missed.
|
On March 29 2011 22:46 Psychlone wrote:
If only Idra learned the composition that crushes Void-Ray Colossus, he would have annihilated this guy.
It is Muck's build, but everybody ignored it.
The hydra drop works nicely too, it was demonstrated by many players already, and its exactly what IdrA did in game 2.
|
IdrA played badly. It's as simple as that, no excuses.
He makes planning strategies against him incredibly easy by always doing the exact same thing. Every game he hands his initiative straight to his opponent. Cruncher may as well have a maphack because he knows exactly what IdrA is doing every minute of every game.
JulyZerg WOULD NOT have lost that series. He knows how to beat lessers players. He gets in their face and breaks their strategies up, then if the game doesn't end early he wins anyway even if he's behind because his multi-tasking/macro is better.
The strong point of IdrA is super strong. His macro so absolutely unrivaled it's approaching genius. Game2 he double Crunchers supply within minutes. But SC2 is far more than just macro.
If IdrA wants to progress as a player he needs to cheese every game, every tournament for the next 6 months. Proper, calculated, well executed, all-in timings.
Roach rush, baneling bust, fast burrrow, fast drop, ling all-in, 6pool, 12 drone rush etc...
Only then can he be an opponent that people are scared of.
|
The reason Semi Pros didn't (often) beat Pros in BW was because of how just f-ing impossible that game is to play at a really high level. You could never do the protoss deathball because you have a limit of 12 units per unit group. The deathball works BECAUSE it's basically a 1 control group super unit. Sure you can do nifty things like pull back the colossus that are being focus fired or blink your stalkers under broodlords or onto the flank of some roaches but basically, box, a, click, win.
Imagine trying to deploy a deathball effectively if your stalkers had dragoon AI, if you had to individually select every high templar in order to storm or you'd end up storming 12 times in the same spot and if whenever your colossus fired, they sometimes decided to shoot at a mineral patch and their lasers just stuck there for a couple seconds before exploding uselessly doing nothing.
Basically, it just wouldn't be nearly as effective and it would take gosux2 micro to actually keep the whole thing balled up, rather than it simply being a function of the game's AI like it is now.
I'm sure this is the root of Idra's rage, but at the same time, he's not exploiting the weaknesses of that formation. The deathball is good because as a cohesive unit, every unit supports the other increasing the overall effectiveness of the whole. It's a big knuckley fist designed to drive right into the throat of the zerg and if the zerg takes it in the throat OF COURSE they're going to choke. That's what it's meant to do. The trick to stopping a big slow punch is to kick the guy in the balls before he has the chance to even throw it. The mobile army of the zerg should always be able to dictate the terms of the battle to the protoss, but Idra constantly engages in pitched battles in the middle, ones which the zerg lair units are horrible at fighting. Lair units work best in small numbers. 20 zerglings in your base is huge pain to deal with but 100 zerglings in the open field is a barbecue. Idra had drop tech in game 1, why wasn't he using some of his super gosux2 apm to ferry zerglings into Cruncher's base to attack his pylons and gateways while he fought the deathball in the center? What good would those zerglings do in the main battle? They'd roast to the colossus before getting off a single nibble, but dropped into the production area of protoss they could cause insane destruction, making it impossible to reinforce the death ball.
Take that fist down one crotch at a time. That's the key. Protoss winds up, you knee him in the groin. He winds up a gain, you knee him in the groin again until he spends so much resources on crotch protection that he's no longer able to walk properly, then you just knock him over.
|
On March 29 2011 10:41 Anihc wrote:Game 3 + Show Spoiler +
- Not much to analyze here, and you're right that Idra making those 7 drones was pretty much his downfall. Although he could have done things to minimize the effects of forcefields such as baiting with smaller groups of units, engaging farther away from his base, and/or spreading out his units.
- It might be interesting to note the mind games here. Idra comes into this matchup expecting 2 4 gates from Cruncher. What he got instead was 2 macro games. Now it's game 3, and Idra must decide whether Cruncher will do what he's best at (or at least what Idra thinks he's best at), which is all-ining, or if he'll try macro again. Idra again opts to be greedy and that leads to his downfall like it has many many times in the past.
That isn't Idra; thats how zerg works at a fundamental level. You either macro or defend, but if you waver and do half and half you'll lose to everything. The problem is a lack of solid intel on what the protoss is doing, and that matchup is difficult because of the ambiguity. You can't call Idra "too greedy" when he is forced to pick drones or army without proper scouting. You can call him lazy with his scouting, but realistically its just super hard for zerg to scout at that 6-gate timing.
|
On March 29 2011 08:26 Charon1979 wrote:Show nested quote +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
That's not at all what I got from his post, don't know what you're reading lol. Didn't see anything about unit composition or APM or anything. Your post seems like the indirect comments about balance.
G1 you complain that Protoss's 200/200 army is the strongest. Which is true, but it's also the least mobile and can't be remaxed as quickly as Zerg's. It does have drawbacks. Idra could have exploited timings and used his 7 bases and huge amounts of gas to just throw units at Cruncher before his army got to a maxed point because he had the econ + hatches to remake units quickly.
G2 you complain that Idra needed high APM to stop Cruncher from turtling up and winning. This seems like the most counterproductive thing to the longevity/health of this game. "It's unfair, I have to have high APM to drop and cripple my opponent effectively!" When has that ever been a legitimate complaint?
G3 You complain that Cruncher didn't need to scout (despite his hallucinated phoenix) when he's going kind of all-in and say Idra was just as greedy as him when he decided to make 7 roaches. If it was a fake push, then yes Idra would have wasted his potential larvae on drones, but the unit composition he saw seemed too stalker heavy to be fake. Hard to say if it was a bad decision but it certainly was the wrong one.
On March 29 2011 23:36 Unwardil wrote:
Take that fist down one crotch at a time. That's the key. Protoss winds up, you knee him in the groin. He winds up again, you knee him in the groin again until he spends so much resources on crotch protection that he's no longer able to walk properly, then you just knock him over.
Best analogy lol.
|
On March 29 2011 10:41 Anihc wrote:Game 3 + Show Spoiler +
- Not much to analyze here, and you're right that Idra making those 7 drones was pretty much his downfall. Although he could have done things to minimize the effects of forcefields such as baiting with smaller groups of units, engaging farther away from his base, and/or spreading out his units.
- It might be interesting to note the mind games here. Idra comes into this matchup expecting 2 4 gates from Cruncher. What he got instead was 2 macro games. Now it's game 3, and Idra must decide whether Cruncher will do what he's best at (or at least what Idra thinks he's best at), which is all-ining, or if he'll try macro again. Idra again opts to be greedy and that leads to his downfall like it has many many times in the past.
Regarding the 3rd game.
Cruncher says he was going for the same build (colossus-voidray) but when his hallucinated phoenix scouted no units he just decided to go kill him. Idra probably underestimating Cruncher, didn't think he would react to scouting information and play exactly like games 1-2 (ironically he himself didn't scout/react properly to Crunchers push and droned). Idra assuming the opponent will do x as he so often does.
|
United Kingdom36156 Posts
On March 29 2011 08:35 Frozenserpent wrote:
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.
Last time I heard, "not losing at once" is a fairly important prerequisite of winning later on.
|
On March 29 2011 23:45 marvellosity wrote:
Last time I heard, "not losing at once" is a fairly important prerequisite of winning later on.
True but it is also quite possible to do something in order to 'not die now' and be pretty sure to 'die later'. Being a canadian, I'll make a hockey analogy:
You are in the last minute of the game, losing 3-2, faceoff at center - you can take out the goaltender now (and have a good chance of dieing now by being scored on) or keep the goaltender in and hope you can score 5 on 5 (but your chances are lower to equal the score since it is 5 on 5) and you die later when the game ends.
As I said earlier - what did IdrA see? zealot/sentry. 90-95% of the time that is a P fake probe.
|
I agree emphatically with everything anihc has said in this thread =D
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
