|
On March 30 2011 01:38 abominable wrote:
you want to discuss a pretty standard P v Z game, where the zerg player was greedy and passive and lost because of it?
you can't avoid the obvious talking point and make a SUMMARY of the series without mentioning the BM.
fact is, idra didn't give credit to cruncher for his play. cruncher deserves credit for his play because he played better.
Game 1 IdrA was greedy if you want to call expanding when the opponent is turtling greedy. He hit 200/200 way before Cruncher, and if you watch the game again he poked at the front, he nydused the back, he poked at the front some more. The problem was (I'm not sure if you've played zerg, so not sure if you realise this), zergs units can be quite fragile. If you over commit, against a stronger force, it can be instant GG because you don't have the time to get back to an overwhelming food advantage. Zerg doesn't get 'power units' like siege tanks or sentries or immortals which in small numbers can change things a lot. Arguably the infestor counts, but this was pre 1.3 when infestors even trying to chain fungal a toss deathball didn't even fully nullify the shields.
I don't know why I'm bothering actually, you have an agenda already. So please, feel entitled to your opinion, just stop cluttering the strategy section by reposting IdrA hate, it's not actually desired here because some of us don't care if it was IdrA, we care that we get stomped by the same 200/200 composition on the ladder and we want to know what mistakes to avoid and what things to take advantage of.
The blizzard forums are probably a better outlet for your frustration.
|
On March 30 2011 01:48 Dreaming11 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2011 01:38 abominable wrote:
you want to discuss a pretty standard P v Z game, where the zerg player was greedy and passive and lost because of it?
you can't avoid the obvious talking point and make a SUMMARY of the series without mentioning the BM.
fact is, idra didn't give credit to cruncher for his play. cruncher deserves credit for his play because he played better. Game 1 IdrA was greedy if you want to call expanding when the opponent is turtling greedy. He hit 200/200 way before Cruncher, and if you watch the game again he poked at the front, he nydused the back, he poked at the front some more. The problem was (I'm not sure if you've played zerg, so not sure if you realise this), zergs units can be quite fragile. If you over commit, against a stronger force, it can be instant GG because you don't have the time to get back to an overwhelming food advantage. Zerg doesn't get 'power units' like siege tanks or sentries or immortals which in small numbers can change things a lot. Arguably the infestor counts, but this was pre 1.3 when infestors even trying to chain fungal a toss deathball didn't even fully nullify the shields. I don't know why I'm bothering actually, you have an agenda already. So please, feel entitled to your opinion, just stop cluttering the strategy section by reposting IdrA hate, it's not actually desired here because some of us don't care if it was IdrA, we care that we get stomped by the same 200/200 composition on the ladder and we want to know what mistakes to avoid and what things to take advantage of. The blizzard forums are probably a better outlet for your frustration.
so heres a quick summary of your post.
Assert: you shouldn't post about idra because the people in this thread are just here to learn how to beat VR/Colo
Acknowledge: The games were played in a different patch and infestors are probably a viable answer.
So what your post reaaally boils down to is wanting to defend idrA's little hissy fits whenever he gets smacked out of a tournament, and trying to cloak it in something more noble.
|
On March 30 2011 00:30 Dragar wrote:
The other reason it's frustrating is zerg is is terribly equipped for this style. Hydras and roaches, amdist the enemy sim-city, with the worst (albeit cheapest and most plentiful after some expensive upgrades) dropships in the game, just aren't good units to inflict quick economic damage and escape.
Worst dropships in the game?
You serious?
They're FREE in food. They actually provide you with MORE food.
Medivac: 2 food, 100/100
Warp Prism: 2 food, 200
Overlord: -8 food, 1 larva, 100
They also poop creep making all their dropped units move faster. Every zerg has lings with ling speed by the late game, 4 overlords full of lings dropped into the main to aim at gateways is no investment whatsoever. They're zerglings, you don't HAVE to retreat them, infact, you'd probably rather they die so that you can make more beefy things to deal with the now unreinforcable death ball.
Overlords are by far the best late game dropships in the game for the simple fact that there is no limit to the number of them you can have.
Actually, come to that, overseers corrupting all the gateways would have exactly the same effect. Little bit more gas involved but less risk involved. It would be a great thing for late game zergs to get a bunch of overseers for that purpose because again, they cost negative food.
|
Idra simply didn't tech. Lair 20 minutes into a game where NO fighting took place? Please.
|
On March 30 2011 01:45 Anihc wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2011 01:15 superstartran wrote:
Idra made a boatload of mistakes in G1 that could have easily won him the game :
1) Hydra drop even on Shakuras is very good especially the way Cruncher opened. Any Hydra drop in his main would have allowed Idra to do serious damage, if not outright win the game. Cruncher was spending all of his early gas on fast tech into VR/Colossus; he had almost no Gateway units. He only had 2 Colossus when a normal Hydra drop happens, so it would have been quite easy for Idra to win (or at least do BIG damage).
Hydra drop play is indeed strong against CrunCher's build. However if you read CrunCher's post game interview, he says that he knew drop play was a weakness to his build and he had practiced specifically against it. Had Idra used drops in game 1, I think it would have been a close battle and not instant win for Idra like you suggest. Cruncher's stargate units would have scouted out the drop coming from miles away, giving him time to warp in extra gateway units to defend. And having 2 colossus in time to defend a hydra drop is huge, do you not realize how weak hydras are off creep against colossus, especially inside someone else's main where they'll have to walk through a maze of buildings? Show nested quote +On March 30 2011 01:15 superstartran wrote:
2) He allowed Cruncher to take an easy 3rd without any kind of punishment / pressure. Anyone who argues otherwise has honestly never played PvZ at a decent level, because Cruncher took that 3rd BEFORE Colossus were even out (before 11 minutes was when it first came up). This type of play would have gotten stomped by Nestea, July, or any other Z who knows how to play early to mid game aggression. Cruncher tailored his build SPECIFICALLY for Idra. It was painfully obvious that Cruncher knew Idra would not try and attack until it was way, way, way too late.
Cruncher also tailored his build to the map. He got that super early 3rd on Shakuras because it is super easy to defend. Stargate opener gives him great scouting against any mid game aggression, and a forcefield on the ramp is all it takes to block attacks on his 3rd. Again, Cruncher stated in his interview that his goal was to get to that 3 base colossus/void ray, and "found all the flaws to a quick 3rd." Do you think he just prayed that Idra wouldn't attack him early on? As further evidence of this, watch the beginning of game 2 closely - Cruncher sends out a 2nd probe to scout after not finding Idra right next to him. He's scouting for a 6 pool! Yes Cruncher knows Idra's style and is playing specifically against it, but in no way is he just doing coin flips. Show nested quote +On March 30 2011 01:15 superstartran wrote:
3) Idra's hive tech was obscenely late; he needed to get Hive tech faster to deal with that deathball, as even though Ultras and Broodlords die to VRs, they are the only units that can do some damage (other than Roaches) to a deathball when it is maxed (other than Infestors who can manage to get close without getting swiped by a Colossus). I'm not sure what game you're playing, but ultras and brood lords are not the answer to colossus/VR. Infestors are great, roaches are great, corruptors are great. And when I say great, I don't mean a 200/200 roach/corruptor/infestor can beat 200/200 colossus/VR/stalker, but it can damage that protoss deathball enough so that a remax to 200/200 can finish it off.
His 3rd timing is extremely greedy, there is no way Cruncher defends that 3rd if Idra actually forces him to fight for it. His unit count was extremely low at that point of the game, leaving him extremely open to Hydra/Roach drops along with multi pronged attacks, or any other type of big attack on a vulnerable position (his 3rd was in a very easily attacked position as he didn't have any troops to defend it, and no cannons at all until later). That particular 3rd is not easy to hold; the 3rd closer to the main is much easier to hold.
Idra is way ahead of Cruncher so even if the Hydra drop gets beat Cruncher is way behind. Forcing any kind of fight / trade was in favor of Idra considering he was on 3 bases very quickly going towards a 4th. Dropping Hydras in main means that if Cruncher doesn't fight it he loses important tech buildings; if he does fight the Hydras, it means that Idra is going to be forcing unit losses on Cruncher. Either way, Idra is coming ahead here.
Cruncher had practiced for drop play but it was painfully obvious that he was not ready for it in G2. A Hydra drop in G1 would have wrecked him, plain and simple. Cruncher's build in particular is almost a coin flip, because any aggressive play / drop play / multi prong attack would put him in a very tough position (almost undefendable with the deathball).
Not to mention Idra's Corrupter control was absolutely atrocious.
|
On March 30 2011 01:57 ValiantGood wrote:
Idra simply didn't tech. Lair 20 minutes into a game where NO fighting took place? Please.
Hive tech would have only helped with upgrades and I think he got it in a timing fashion to get his 3-3. Hive tech doesn't equip you with a means to deal with maxed out Colossi/void ray. So no Idra's "mistake" wasn't that he didn't tech. There were various smaller mistakes that just built up.
I see no reason to post rubbish 1 liners. Anihc posted a great summary.
|
On March 30 2011 01:28 abominable wrote:some people are so ignorant... you don't know the half of idra's BM towards cruncher. http://www.wcreplays.com/forums/showthread.php?t=133215IdrA: "I just went on to NA server to bash some newbies" JP: "So is Cruncher one of these newbies?" IdrA: "Yep" http://www.wcreplays.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2689991&postcount=152"idra: you're pretty talented" (after game 1) "idra: boy it must suck when skill matters" (after game 2) idra is lucky that cruncher doesn't rename himself "idra went crunch". i don't doubt that idra is a great player... but he hasn't won much so i don't think he has any right to treat more successful players like they're 'bad'. officially, cruncher is better than idra.. idra just has to live with that until he wins something.
So IdrA hasn't won anything? Except for MLG Dallas, King of the Beta, and the Hello Goodbye tournament? As well as Ro8 in the GSL, the toughest tournament around?
And Cruncher has won... 2 weekly tournaments and a TL Open. Yeah, the TL Opens are good tournaments but I hardly think Cruncher is the more successful player.
Come on man.
|
he drone drone drone, me win :D
|
On March 30 2011 01:15 superstartran wrote:
Idra made mistakes that Diamond / Low Master Z players make all the time, which is sit back camp and macro up hoping to overwhelm a 200/200 deathball, but allowing it to move into the center of the map.
Idra attacked when he hit 200/200, and the Cruncher was still 150ish. This is a pretty standard attack timing for high-level play.
On March 30 2011 01:15 superstartran wrote:
Idra made a boatload of mistakes in G1 that could have easily won him the game :
1) Hydra drop even on Shakuras is very good especially the way Cruncher opened. Any Hydra drop in his main would have allowed Idra to do serious damage, if not outright win the game. Cruncher was spending all of his early gas on fast tech into VR/Colossus; he had almost no Gateway units. He only had 2 Colossus when a normal Hydra drop happens, so it would have been quite easy for Idra to win (or at least do BIG damage).
2) He allowed Cruncher to take an easy 3rd without any kind of punishment / pressure. Anyone who argues otherwise has honestly never played PvZ at a decent level, because Cruncher took that 3rd BEFORE Colossus were even out (before 11 minutes was when it first came up). This type of play would have gotten stomped by Nestea, July, or any other Z who knows how to play early to mid game aggression. Cruncher tailored his build SPECIFICALLY for Idra. It was painfully obvious that Cruncher knew Idra would not try and attack until it was way, way, way too late.
These aren't mistakes, they're strategic choices: macro vs aggression. Obviously if it doesn't work out, you can just point and say "you should have done the other option". The truth is that neither choice is clearly better than the other, otherwise it would be standard and there would be no real choice. The fact that there is no standard play proves that it wasn't a mistake, but just a strategic choice.
On March 30 2011 01:15 superstartran wrote:
3) Idra's hive tech was obscenely late; he needed to get Hive tech faster to deal with that deathball, as even though Ultras and Broodlords die to VRs, they are the only units that can do some damage (other than Roaches) to a deathball when it is maxed (other than Infestors who can manage to get close without getting swiped by a Colossus).
You believe it's a mistake not to spend tons of gas to tech to T3 units, all of which are massive, and none of which can attack up, against mass void rays? /boggle
You may disagree with Idra's strategic choices, but they are not mistakes, these are decisions made deliberately by someone that understands the game at a very very high level. This is in contrast to basic beginner mistakes like putting colossi on the same key as a main army, failing to watch the minimap for drops, and becoming completely overwhelmed by a simple double drop. There is no reasonable excuse for this from a pro-level player.
|
On March 30 2011 01:56 Unwardil wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2011 00:30 Dragar wrote:
The other reason it's frustrating is zerg is is terribly equipped for this style. Hydras and roaches, amdist the enemy sim-city, with the worst (albeit cheapest and most plentiful after some expensive upgrades) dropships in the game, just aren't good units to inflict quick economic damage and escape.
Worst dropships in the game? You serious? They're FREE in food. They actually provide you with MORE food. Medivac: 2 food, 100/100 Warp Prism: 2 food, 200 Overlord: -8 food, 1 larva, 100 They also poop creep making all their dropped units move faster. Every zerg has lings with ling speed by the late game, 4 overlords full of lings dropped into the main to aim at gateways is no investment whatsoever. They're zerglings, you don't HAVE to retreat them, infact, you'd probably rather they die so that you can make more beefy things to deal with the now unreinforcable death ball. Overlords are by far the best late game dropships in the game for the simple fact that there is no limit to the number of them you can have. Actually, come to that, overseers corrupting all the gateways would have exactly the same effect. Little bit more gas involved but less risk involved. It would be a great thing for late game zergs to get a bunch of overseers for that purpose because again, they cost negative food.
Warp prisms are pretty poor as dropships, I agree (though see White-Ra's recent PvP!). But everything you just rambled about overlords is irrelevent for how they perform their role in multipronged harass. They serve a purpose, but they don't turn your roach/hydra/overlord into MMM. You can't do that style of harass (or at least, not unless you're significantly better than your opponent, or have some other crazy advantage going on).
Zerglings dropped into the main just throws away your minerals/production capacity. You need to be a lot better than just 'lol lings in your main'.
|
I think someone with no credentials should probably not do analysis.... just saying. I am not trying to hate on the OP but like I rather have a blue guy do an analysis than some random clearly biased guy.
|
I wasn't advocating trying to do m/m/m with zerg, I was saying that when you've got the deathball pinned in the center of the map, there's no damn way it can get back to deal with zerglings killing all your gateways. The overlords have only got to get the lings over the cliff, that's a very short transport distance and because overlords are FREE on food, you always have this option available to you. If you're 20 minutes into the game and you haven't just automatically upgraded ventral sacks, you deserve to lose.
|
idra knew his 200/200 would be weak against the protoss 200/200, but he played towards it anyway and didn't have any plan to deal with it and prevent the inevitable.
would you rather:
a) spot greedy build and cheese (NOT necessarily ALL-IN until you're sure it's going to work) and potentially not use any skill to win the match except for a few moments of insane micro.
b) say "sure, gogo econ macro and let's fight at 200/200", knowing what you know about zerg units being 'fragile', but continue anyway because it's a great measure of skill when you have to build more hatcheries, press D and spread creep.
i don't know about you, but i'd rather choose a) in an important game and i'd also much prefer watching an a) as opposed to having to watch a boring 20 minute passive snooze-fest at the start of each game.
|
On March 29 2011 23:42 StUfF wrote:
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.
No way that's true. Crucher was going for the 4gate, got scouted, so he went 6 gate. I'm not intimately familiar with the 6gate timing, but this one felt pretty damn quick.
IdrA saw the 4gate coming, figured it was fake, but then guessed wrong on the followup. He saw a second nexus and a ton of sentries. It's not hard to see how you could read that as a very fast Protoss 3rd. His final error - the 7 drones - was queued before his watchtower could see the advancing units.
As for the BM, I don't understand why ppl aren't laughing at it. IdrA's gigantic ego and butthurt are so predictable and pointless that they're absolutely hilarious. Takes vastly more insult and flaming to get people mad on forums, what's so different about playing an online game?
EDIT: Can't believe this argument is happening in this thread, but... The dropships all carry 8 spaces of units slowly anywhere on the map and give vision. Each species has added value to their units.
Terran: Heals units. Expensive per unit.
Protoss: Can create units on the spot. High mineral cost.
Zerg: Provides supply. Can generate creep while stationary. Cheap to produce.
As we can see, their primary roles as dropships are basically the same, but it's their different specials and relative costs that differentiate them. They are unquestionably different, but their usefulness depends on style and situation. Griping about them even reasonably well requires a lot more consideration that most are giving.
|
On March 30 2011 02:16 heaven- wrote:
I think someone with no credentials should probably not do analysis.... just saying. I am not trying to hate on the OP but like I rather have a blue guy do an analysis than some random clearly biased guy.
The blue poster's analysis pretty much agrees with nearly all of my points, not to mention, knowing the way the forum thinks no credentials would be enough, even if I was a semi-pro people would say "you haven't even won a tournament, you are garbage!" Just read the analysis, and come to your own conclusions. And I'm tired of addressing these bias comments just because the first reply is a blue poster saying I am biased and derailing the entire thing, I've addressed that my analysis is more heavily focused on Idra's play (but this does not subtract from the analysis) then on Cruncher and I've addressed why, I think I've been more than fair. There are things to learn from these games and I point them out, or you can ignore them and learn nothing.
|
On March 30 2011 02:12 Nakas wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2011 01:15 superstartran wrote:
Idra made mistakes that Diamond / Low Master Z players make all the time, which is sit back camp and macro up hoping to overwhelm a 200/200 deathball, but allowing it to move into the center of the map. Idra attacked when he hit 200/200, and the Cruncher was still 150ish. This is a pretty standard attack timing for high-level play. Show nested quote +On March 30 2011 01:15 superstartran wrote:
Idra made a boatload of mistakes in G1 that could have easily won him the game :
1) Hydra drop even on Shakuras is very good especially the way Cruncher opened. Any Hydra drop in his main would have allowed Idra to do serious damage, if not outright win the game. Cruncher was spending all of his early gas on fast tech into VR/Colossus; he had almost no Gateway units. He only had 2 Colossus when a normal Hydra drop happens, so it would have been quite easy for Idra to win (or at least do BIG damage).
2) He allowed Cruncher to take an easy 3rd without any kind of punishment / pressure. Anyone who argues otherwise has honestly never played PvZ at a decent level, because Cruncher took that 3rd BEFORE Colossus were even out (before 11 minutes was when it first came up). This type of play would have gotten stomped by Nestea, July, or any other Z who knows how to play early to mid game aggression. Cruncher tailored his build SPECIFICALLY for Idra. It was painfully obvious that Cruncher knew Idra would not try and attack until it was way, way, way too late.
These aren't mistakes, they're strategic choices: macro vs aggression. Obviously if it doesn't work out, you can just point and say "you should have done the other option". The truth is that neither choice is clearly better than the other, otherwise it would be standard and there would be no real choice. The fact that there is no standard play proves that it wasn't a mistake, but just a strategic choice. Show nested quote +On March 30 2011 01:15 superstartran wrote:
3) Idra's hive tech was obscenely late; he needed to get Hive tech faster to deal with that deathball, as even though Ultras and Broodlords die to VRs, they are the only units that can do some damage (other than Roaches) to a deathball when it is maxed (other than Infestors who can manage to get close without getting swiped by a Colossus). You believe it's a mistake not to spend tons of gas to tech to T3 units, all of which are massive, and none of which can attack up, against mass void rays? /boggle You may disagree with Idra's strategic choices, but they are not mistakes, these are decisions made deliberately by someone that understands the game at a very very high level. This is in contrast to basic beginner mistakes like putting colossi on the same key as a main army, failing to watch the minimap for drops, and becoming completely overwhelmed by a simple double drop. There is no reasonable excuse for this from a pro-level player.
They are mistakes.
Idra allowed Cruncher to put down the 3rd before the 11 minute mark, and left him unpunished even though Cruncher opened with a build that is VERY punishable.You need a Gateway army to defend that 3rd, of which Cruncher had no sort. Any bust play would have killed Cruncher's 3rd severely delaying the 200 deathball.
Cruncher took a 3rd that is HARD to defend. The 3rd near his base is much easier to defend due to proximity and positioning of said 3rd. The 3rd at the top is easily killed once you get down the ramp. The 3rd near Cruncher's base is a MUCH tougher 3rd to break.
Idra allowed Cruncher to saturate the 3rd, and continue to make a huge deathball without attempting any sort of decent trade.
Idra with Ultras could have broken forcefields, killed off the limited ground force supporting his VRs, and proceed to clean-up with reinforcement Hydra/Corrupters. If I see Machine, July, Nestea, Morrow, and other Z players do it, why can't Idra?
It is standard play for Z to play VERY aggressive when P player is just massing up a deathball like that; anyone who just stands there and waits for it is asking to lose. That is what Idra did and that is why he deserved to lose game 1, despite the multiple amount of oppertunities he had to just go over there and kill Cruncher. If It was Nestea, July, or any other top Z player in Idra's position they would have 100% won G1 with the amount of map control that they had, because they would have contested Cruncher's 3rd and forced him to fight for it, thus creating the perfect opportunity to trade armies, which heavily favors the Z at that point.
Idra of course made the huge mistake of doing not doing such a thing, and got wiped out because of it. Cruncher essentially does almost the virtually same build in G2 and gets ROLLED by a Hydra drop. You're telling me that a Hydra drop wouldn't have beaten Cruncher in G1 with his super low unit count, super early 3rd, and super fast tech? Cruncher was playing so greedy that it was hilarious; he knew Idra would not attack, and abused that fact. It is just how Jinro can get away with double expanding vs Idra but not vs Morrow. Idra's one dimensional play is starting to really show its ugly head, and that is why he keeps getting beat by worse and worse players, because he refuses to adapt. In a game like SC2 that is constantly evolving, Idra refuses to improve his other skill sets in order to compete, and that's why he is starting to lose ground on the tournament scene.
|
On March 30 2011 01:52 m3rciless wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2011 01:48 Dreaming11 wrote:On March 30 2011 01:38 abominable wrote:
you want to discuss a pretty standard P v Z game, where the zerg player was greedy and passive and lost because of it?
you can't avoid the obvious talking point and make a SUMMARY of the series without mentioning the BM.
fact is, idra didn't give credit to cruncher for his play. cruncher deserves credit for his play because he played better. Game 1 IdrA was greedy if you want to call expanding when the opponent is turtling greedy. He hit 200/200 way before Cruncher, and if you watch the game again he poked at the front, he nydused the back, he poked at the front some more. The problem was (I'm not sure if you've played zerg, so not sure if you realise this), zergs units can be quite fragile. If you over commit, against a stronger force, it can be instant GG because you don't have the time to get back to an overwhelming food advantage. Zerg doesn't get 'power units' like siege tanks or sentries or immortals which in small numbers can change things a lot. Arguably the infestor counts, but this was pre 1.3 when infestors even trying to chain fungal a toss deathball didn't even fully nullify the shields. I don't know why I'm bothering actually, you have an agenda already. So please, feel entitled to your opinion, just stop cluttering the strategy section by reposting IdrA hate, it's not actually desired here because some of us don't care if it was IdrA, we care that we get stomped by the same 200/200 composition on the ladder and we want to know what mistakes to avoid and what things to take advantage of. The blizzard forums are probably a better outlet for your frustration. so heres a quick summary of your post. Assert: you shouldn't post about idra because the people in this thread are just here to learn how to beat VR/Colo Acknowledge: The games were played in a different patch and infestors are probably a viable answer. So what your post reaaally boils down to is wanting to defend idrA's little hissy fits whenever he gets smacked out of a tournament, and trying to cloak it in something more noble.
Actually I don't agree with your summary of my post at all.
I said arguably the infestor could be a power unit vs protoss because it was buffed in 1.3, but I don't know. People are welcome to post about IdrA all they like, but there is a place for it, if they want to say '[G] IdrAs Macrozerg ZvP' or even 'IdrAs macrozerg style sucks, here's why' fine, if they want to say 'Idra very BM player I dont like him' there's another section for it, no need to clutter up a thread about the actual strategy / analysis in the games. Just the same as if someone was moaning about Cruncher.
The only way I could be possibly said to be defending idra is by saying please take the IdrA bashing to another thread.
|
On March 30 2011 02:17 Unwardil wrote:
I wasn't advocating trying to do m/m/m with zerg, I was saying that when you've got the deathball pinned in the center of the map, there's no damn way it can get back to deal with zerglings killing all your gateways. The overlords have only got to get the lings over the cliff, that's a very short transport distance and because overlords are FREE on food, you always have this option available to you. If you're 20 minutes into the game and you haven't just automatically upgraded ventral sacks, you deserve to lose.
Or you warp in a round of zealots, clean up. Or lose all your gateways and smile as your deathball crushes the zerg army, that is even smaller than usual because of that drop.
|
On March 30 2011 02:24 confusedcrib wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2011 02:16 heaven- wrote:
I think someone with no credentials should probably not do analysis.... just saying. I am not trying to hate on the OP but like I rather have a blue guy do an analysis than some random clearly biased guy. The blue poster's analysis pretty much agrees with nearly all of my points, not to mention, knowing the way the forum thinks no credentials would be enough, even if I was a semi-pro people would say "you haven't even won a tournament, you are garbage!" Just read the analysis, and come to your own conclusions. And I'm tired of addressing these bias comments just because the first reply is a blue poster saying I am biased and derailing the entire thing, I've addressed that my analysis is more heavily focused on Idra's play (but this does not subtract from the analysis) then on Cruncher and I've addressed why, I think I've been more than fair. There are things to learn from these games and I point them out, or you can ignore them and learn nothing.
From my understanding of the blue posts, saying he "pretty much agrees with nearly all of [your] points" simply isn't true, not to mention an extremely loaded sentence ('pretty much', 'nearly', how can you say this without feeling like a salesman????).
I think this has been said before in the topic, but I think in Game 3 idrA would have been fine if one or two of the extra seven drones were morphed into Spine Crawlers. He could have had a much better engage closer to his base; quicker to reinforce, and safer in general. Would he have won? Who knows, but I can't imagine he would have gotten rolled as easily as he did.
I was really impressed with Cruncher's play. It's very obvious that he spent a lot of time practicing vs idrA's macro-heavy play style. I'm definitely looking forward to his next match. Anyone who hasn't checked out Day9's Sunday show from this week really should watch it.
|
On March 30 2011 02:33 Albrithe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2011 02:24 confusedcrib wrote:On March 30 2011 02:16 heaven- wrote:
I think someone with no credentials should probably not do analysis.... just saying. I am not trying to hate on the OP but like I rather have a blue guy do an analysis than some random clearly biased guy. The blue poster's analysis pretty much agrees with nearly all of my points, not to mention, knowing the way the forum thinks no credentials would be enough, even if I was a semi-pro people would say "you haven't even won a tournament, you are garbage!" Just read the analysis, and come to your own conclusions. And I'm tired of addressing these bias comments just because the first reply is a blue poster saying I am biased and derailing the entire thing, I've addressed that my analysis is more heavily focused on Idra's play (but this does not subtract from the analysis) then on Cruncher and I've addressed why, I think I've been more than fair. There are things to learn from these games and I point them out, or you can ignore them and learn nothing. From my understanding of the blue posts, saying he "pretty much agrees with nearly all of [your] points" simply isn't true, not to mention an extremely loaded sentence ('pretty much', 'nearly', how can you say this without feeling like a salesman????).
Read his analysis on page 3, where he actually addresses the games themselves, we agree on almost everything. I wasn't aware that adverbs shouldn't be used on the forum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
