|
On April 12 2011 17:29 aXa wrote:
It looks like nobody cares about zergling/baneling/infestor, which is the main point of the guide, but they really get passionate when it comes about 9 pool ^^
Dude im loving your composition and ill post some replays here when i get some matches against good protoss.
@evanthebouncy!:
I checked your replay on backwater gulch... tho... errm the name says its backwater gulch but actually the replay is of a ZvP on typhon peaks  anyways:
You just got out macrod hard on this game. The toss went for an sick risky fast nexus on a map with a very open natural. He had no production capacity whatsoever till around the 8 minutes. All the time he was 10 more harvesters ahead and his supply did not weaver from yours. My experience thus far with the bling-infest-ultra compo is that it needs so much gas, so you cannot have your opponent out macro you. The other part is, that you need to kill his army in one powerful blow, so he has a hard time to rebuild. Land fungals, surround and blow it up with the bling ultra. But you wasted prematurely your banelings on zealots and let his bulk stalker army escape. The protoss then had the chance to use his macro advantage and refill his weakened ball. Rest of the match was also a lot of chaos and army miss rally, only portions of zerg vs ball of toss, etc.
|
Lately i played a linq /bling versus a protoss friend with a fast 3rd + macro hatch. But started with 15 hatch 14 pool.
And it was so funny and a nice gameplay variation, that i thought i should do this on ladder soon.
Now i will definitely stick with it : )
Thanks for the good post!
About the APM thing... On lower leagues the opponent doesn't have perfect mechanics and micro, too so I don't think it matters that much. Sure good injects weill make this much more effective.
|
I really dislike the OPs build here.
First, the basis of the build is a 9-pool.
Now, I'm a pretty cheesy guy and am willing to open up 7-pool 50% of the time vs a Protoss, but a 9-pool is going to do jack vs a super standard 12-gate when you chrono out a zealot.
7-pool is slow enough due to the fact that a forge-first build WILL have a cannon out in time to stop you from doing any meaningful damage, but a 9-pool isn't even going to discourage a standard 4-gate timing push due to the fact that you won't get up your opponents ramp before a chrono'd zealot is out.
The only thing a 9-pool is going to do is put you behind economically and ensure the 4-gate push does max damage.
Then you try to justify your terribly timed "not-so-early" aggression with talking about a wholly different tactic in ling/bling/infestor.
Not to say that ling/bling/infestor is bad on its own, but it doesn't justify the terrible opener, nor does it actually have anything to do with it what-so-ever.
This is 2 different tactics mashed together into one thread, and I'm sorry I bumped it with this post.
|
Lol guy, you just don't know what you are talking about. A 9 pool does damage against a standard 12 gate chrooboosted zealot, as my replay shows. It doesn't put you economically ENOUGH (yes it does, but not a lot at all) to make you lose the game, especially against a 4 gate, the easiest thing to play against when you do mass zergling. A standard 4 warp gate require 20 probe on 1 base. With this 9 pool opener i suggested, you are at 20-23 probe on 2 base, with 2 queen. It means that you can produce enough army to hold the agression without any problem, because you have a better production and economy capacity, as well as a better compo.
You are just arguing things and you don't have any proof. You make me laugh, talking about 7 pool, a strat you certainly can't recover from. With a 9 pool, you can.
Zergling baneling infestor can be done with any kind of opening. If i made the 9 pool opening with this late game compo together, it's only because i don't think it was worthing it to make 2 different topic about ZvP.
|
I want to honestly ask why some of you guys even post here?
There is more to the build than 9 pool, it is actually a REALLY good unit composition for zvp right now.
No one is forcing you to use the 9 pool, or any part of the build.
Yet aXa is able to win at the master's level with this unit composition, after setting himself behind with a 9 pool opening. Try pulling that off with roach/hydra/corrupter, can you win with a 9 pool opening against a forge FE toss at the master's level? Highly unlikely.
Maybe you guys should focus on the good more than the bad, I mean why not? Most of you will have to wait until you see a pro-zerg win a match with ling/bling/infestor/ultra before you will understand the value of this post.
I really appreciate Skrag going in depth as to WHY 9 pool is not so good, but now you guys are just beating a dead horse, and complaining for the sake of complaining.
Open with 14 hatch, use the unit comp, profit.
Tired of getting forcefield raped? Tired of having to mass air-to-air units to deal with a ground army, only to have a good toss switch to mass stalker while you have tons of corrupter supply? Tired of being in a 200 vs. 200 situation, equal economy, and still losing the game? This unit comp is for you. Standard toss play can't even handle it, they are going to have to start using a lot more immortals and high templar.
|
Thanks Treemonkeys. I know i should let the hater hate, but writting this post took me 5 hours. I'm not english and it is not as easy as it looks like to write a so long post in a foreign language. I was really proud of myself when i found by myself all this strategy, 9 pool and ling bling infestor, more so because i was frustrated to lose against protoss less skilled than me. I was frustrated to see Cruncher beat Idra either. It does matter to me.
|
My gripe isn't with the ling/bling/infestor tactic. It's good, I've used it. My gripe is with the 9-pool, which is ineffective; and the general format of the OP, which tries to prove its point by combining two wholly different and unrelated tactics.
9-pool sets you behind while simultaneously being too slow to do meaningful economic damage to your opponent.
It's an ineffective half-cheese that doesn't hit early enough to get past standard play while still reaping all the benefits of economic suicide.
If you want a cheesy opener vs Protoss that isn't 100% all in, do a 7 pool. Your lings will get to your opponents base a full 30 seconds earlier than a 9-pool would and having that 1 extra drone keeps your income flowing just enough to follow up with an economic game when compared to a 6 pool.
Having a good mid-game doesn't justify a terrible opener.
This should be 2 different threads. One to discuss the benefits of ling/bling/infestor. This could bloom in to a fruitful discussion of the pros/cons of the build and talk about tactics to effectively employ this unit comp.
The second thread could discuss 9-pool, which would quickly be rejected and be pushed down into the abyss.
|
You basically just posted the same rant you posted a few posts above, again. You REALLY don't like 9 pool, I get it. How about making your own thread that you desire, sharing your replays of you supposedly going ling/bling/infester, or contributing in some way.
|
You tried to tell me to ignore the first half of the build and use the 2nd half, telling me I'm going to have to see a pro use ling/bling/infestor before I can justify it, which was way off.
I'm not going to get into a onesie-twosie post fight here, my point isn't about that part of the build, which is decent. It's about the fact that the OP, and this thread is so mucked up by throwing the 9-pool in there, that I can't find anything meaningful in this thread to help my ling/bling/infestor play get better.
Either way, this is the last post I'll make here, continue on how you please.
|
aXa,
I watched your "ZvPStandard" game where you lost your 3rd but still won the game. When you lost your 3rd is also the timing I have the most problems with. I have lost many games where I tried to defend the 3rd and wasn't ready too. I think it is safe to say, just take a later 3rd? It also seems like you really have to CRUSH that first push completely. I lose games where I *almost* crush it but one colossus and some stalkers survive and then it just snowballs out of control, probably because of how larva expensive everything is once you lose the initial fight.
I am thinking that we don't have to worry as much about staying up one base against the toss with this composition BUT once it is close to ultralisk timing, we really need a fuck ton of both gas and minerals. I am working on taking a much later 3rd but getting the 3rd and 4th at the same time, using one for gas only.
I also feel I lose to that mid-game timing because of having too many infestors and not enough gas for banelings. 3-4 seems like a sweet spot for me, just enough to cover his whole army with fungal. 6 seems like too many and costs me the game, if I almost crush the army I am left with no energy infestors and nothing else. I don't use NP as much as you do though.
|
On April 12 2011 23:59 Jermstuddog wrote:
This should be 2 different threads. One to discuss the benefits of ling/bling/infestor. This could bloom in to a fruitful discussion of the pros/cons of the build and talk about tactics to effectively employ this unit comp.
The second thread could discuss 9-pool, which would quickly be rejected and be pushed down into the abyss.
+1.
There's a reason nobody talks about 9pooling, but the ling/bling/infestor midgame, adding ultras lategame is something that's very interesting, is becoming quite popular, and seems very strong, at least in the current metagame.
|
@axa
the reason people keep bashing 9pool and not the rest of the build is because they like everything except the opening. That's a good thing.
The reason why they are looking at the 9pool is because it's already been talked about in a few threads. It was found out that 11pool18hatch is the best early pool opening and 14hatch15pool is the best late pool opening. The standard safe opening is 14extractor14pool because o zergling speed. If you forgo zergling speed but want early lings you do 11pool18hatch. If you want to defend with spines instead, then 14hatch15pool.
These openers are mathematically better than 9pool both in terms of larva and minerals.
That's all that's being said.
|
The 9 pool and ling/bane/infest discussions should be kept separate.
And no, its not unanimous in these forums that a 9 pool in the circumstances you discribed is a bad thing. You HAVE to do damage, but 300-400 mins of damage and/or a delayed cyber core is enough. At most you gave him a few probes and a free forge/cannon, which is workable.
|
I didn't know, that there is good way to actually hurt toss with banelings and i LOVE IT ;-)
I love even hated 9 pool in there, because ... you are not that behind (yeah, there are better openers), you can actually force toss to play something else then his practised build which can be fun ;-)
But ... i watched some of replays and ... they are bit off tbh ;-( Bad forcefielding from toss player (you always found a way around them, which is unacceptable)...
DO you have one against 5 or 6 gate or better both? ;-)
Thx for your effort posting it ;-)
|
On April 13 2011 02:49 Pamposek wrote:
I didn't know, that there is good way to actually hurt toss with banelings and i LOVE IT ;-)
I love even hated 9 pool in there, because ... you are not that behind (yeah, there are better openers), you can actually force toss to play something else then his practised build which can be fun ;-)
But ... i watched some of replays and ... they are bit off tbh ;-( Bad forcefielding from toss player (you always found a way around them, which is unacceptable)...
DO you have one against 5 or 6 gate or better both? ;-)
Thx for your effort posting it ;-)
To be fair, it can be really, really hard to forcefield properly with mass banes. All it takes is one hole and so many sentries can die. Toss has to have nearly perfect FF or he will get punished for it.
|
I use this style to crush toss on ladder (low-mid masters on USA). Now the secret is out of the bag! I don't open with 9 pool but rather 14 gas 14 pool, but everything else is basically identical. The heavy ling baneling aggression is fantastic at restricting the economy of the protoss player and avoids the late-game 200 death ball scenario. You really do need to keep on top of your larva injects though, or you will get crushed with 1k in the bank and be a sad panda.
Do not be afraid to stop making drones and instead throw army after army at the toss to keep their supply low! The mantra of many zergs is 'zerg needs +1 base on terran or toss to win'. I don't like this statement, because it implies that a 5 base zerg vs 4 base terran/toss is OK. Fighting against 4 base terran/toss in my book is NEVER OK, even if you have 8 bases yourself! Be aggressive and don't let your opponent obtain a 3rd base! The difference in gas mining between 3 base zerg 2 base toss/terran is +50%! This drops to a measly +25% when its a 5base vs 4 base scenario.
On paper banelings sound like a horrible idea vs toss, but in reality when you see 100 upgraded banelings roll into a protoss deathball with zergling backup and crush it to pieces, you will become a believer XD
|
On April 11 2011 22:25 aXa wrote:
Against a forge expand
The canon will often be up before you can slip through with your zergling. So no damage at all and he will probably fast expand. It's still okay for you: Don't put any drone in gaz, take a second and a third expand immediately. Then do the usual following i will describe next. You can maybe force more than 1 canon with your initial pressure zergling, it can be useful. You know that protoss is not gonna move anytime soon so take map control and drone hard.
Like most have said this guide has a very nice midgame and lategame but the opening is poor and is only working by poor responses.
I don't see how a 9 pool that does no damage vs a low ground forge + cannon nexus build can possibly be "okay for you". It's demonstrably worse than going for any opener that gets a pool after an overlord. He can go hurt you badly with a stalker or even cannon rushing your expansions while building up a strong 6gate +1 timing attack that will end the game. You can't deny him from scouting what you're up to with slow lings.
A more proper response to a 7/8/9 pool is to do everything normal but put only 1 probe on gas chrono boost out the zealot before starting the core and then pulling off 5 probes when the lings arrive to mineral walk down the ramp and trap the lings between the zealot and the probes. Killing any of the lings you can but certainly preventing them from doing any damage beyond the lost mining time. As soon as your 2nd zealot is out you are completely safe as protoss and you haven't delayed your warpgate tech at all (1 probe on gas gives you 50 gas when the core finishes) from there you just do a 20 probe 1gas 4gate and win. Zerg cannot survive this unless protoss makes a mistake.
A one gas 4gate is already hard for zerg to hold when they have more larva and a better economy with faster ling speed I don't understand the rationale for thinking you're fine against a 4gate unless the protoss makes a mistake, like building a forge & cannon to hold after opening up gateway at his ramp.
I don't suppose you have an account on NA so we can play it out a few times?
|
On April 13 2011 00:26 Treemonkeys wrote:
aXa,
I watched your "ZvPStandard" game where you lost your 3rd but still won the game. When you lost your 3rd is also the timing I have the most problems with. I have lost many games where I tried to defend the 3rd and wasn't ready too. I think it is safe to say, just take a later 3rd? It also seems like you really have to CRUSH that first push completely. I lose games where I *almost* crush it but one colossus and some stalkers survive and then it just snowballs out of control, probably because of how larva expensive everything is once you lose the initial fight.
I am thinking that we don't have to worry as much about staying up one base against the toss with this composition BUT once it is close to ultralisk timing, we really need a fuck ton of both gas and minerals. I am working on taking a much later 3rd but getting the 3rd and 4th at the same time, using one for gas only.
I also feel I lose to that mid-game timing because of having too many infestors and not enough gas for banelings. 3-4 seems like a sweet spot for me, just enough to cover his whole army with fungal. 6 seems like too many and costs me the game, if I almost crush the army I am left with no energy infestors and nothing else. I don't use NP as much as you do though.
Yeah definitely don't overmake infestors. They are like templars and need support. I thought they'd just be omfg pwn everything but no they are not. Baneling still deals more damange than fungal, even though fungle is puffed.
|
very interesting, I'll definitely try it out.
|
Finally, aXa strategy is fine if we assume that he can do a minimum damage to the Protoss economy. If not, this is a waste of income due to the 6lings cost. But if we assume that the 6Lings manage to do some damage / waste of mining time / force defence or just disturb the BO of the opponent, this is an interesting opening.
As mentioned upper, this is a question of microing Lings / Zealot&Probes => Best micro wins.
I like the aXa's way of thinking. May be Zerg is not only a reactive race during the early game. We can be more aggressive with a good win ratio against Protoss... Sometimes people think something impossible which is not. Remember Boxer and his night elves... he develops the race, the strategy...
Sometimes we need to think different to go forward. I like The aggressive build presented by aXa!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
