[G] GrandMaster SC2 Lecture: Aggressive Zerg Play - Page 2

On October 23 2011 07:24 TangSC wrote:


Sen is awesome, everyone should watch sen/nestea/julyzerg/losira/DRG games if they want to play aggressive zerg.

On October 23 2011 07:38 solidbebe wrote:


Nice to ignore everything else I said.

On October 23 2011 07:14 solidbebe wrote:
No offense to this guy, but I really get the idea you're putting out all these guides just for bragging, your previous guides were both about old builds that everyone knew already and that you decided would make a good excuse to make a thread, and this 'guide'. What does it say besides that zerg should be aggressive ( which has been a seconday style for a long time too, and on which alot of guides have been reading such as Axa's start the aggression guide ), that you're a grandmasters player and a few aggressive builds that are already pretty known and some of which are used by pro's ( like your roach ling attack vs terran, sen just did that a few times at blizzcon vs MVP and select, people could just load up some replays from sen and learn them themselves).

On October 23 2011 01:57 Vogin wrote:
Finally someone trying to popularize actually playing the game instead of the boring macro wars.

On October 23 2011 07:44 junghansmega wrote:
omg, its a youtube video inside a youtube video...!

On October 23 2011 01:50 TangSC wrote:
Blind Cheese versus Aggressive Response
+ Show Spoiler +
You might ask...Why is Zerg a good race to be aggressive with?

On October 23 2011 11:54 michaelhasanalias wrote:



Look man, stop posting horrible, awful shit and claiming it as some grandmaster guide. I like that you have the mental capacity to distinguish between blind cheese and "aggressive response." This is a key still that all good players should have, but come on...

After a four minute advertisement by the caster to start this game talking about how you're a professional player but are "just keeping it local" (what the fuck?), you blindly put 3 back on gas before scouting your opponent or starting your second queen. This is a telltale sign that it's just the "tang special" ling bling or roach ling allin.

I've trolled you a lot asking you to finally write some guides on how to execute the only rigid, set builds you know how to do. Instead, you post these lengthy, spam-filled guides disguising them as some kind of higher order thinking.

That baneling bust you do would never have worked unless you hadn't intended on going for it in the opening 3 minutes of the game. As soon as you leave a drone on gas, off 14/14, you're being greedy because you delay your 2nd queen. As soon as you put 3 back on gas, you almost abandon your 2nd queen without having even scouted your opponent.

And what do you followup your all-in with but another all-in, followed by a third. It isn't because you're good, or being clever, but it's because this is all you know how to do. Even your friend comments on how he doesn't understand why you keep committing to it.

So, you went all-in blindly with a rigid build order, followed by a second all-in, and a third. Only after a lengthy stall are you able to finally almost break somewhat even with the protoss and then transition into what looks like a normal game 10 minutes later.

But what happens? Are you abusing a timing? Are you playing smart? No, you just don't know what to do because you can't play a macro game, so you cut drones and decide to mass roach and attack again hoping he'll die. Lucky for you your opponent makes a decision based on what a macro player might be doing (not cutting drones for pure roach production 3 minutes prior to his attack,) so you're able to crush what should have been a very aggressive blind stalker push.




I don't know man. I hate bashing people, but you wouldn't know it by this post. One thing I absolutely loathe in life is someone like you who makes himself by taking advantage of people who don't know any better. You lie and deceive people, but you do it so consistently and adamantly that enough low level players believe you, take what you say to heart, and try to imitate you and/or pay for lessons.

When it all comes down to it though, you're still and have always been merely advocating the lowest form of play, which is blind cheese. You can try to package it any way you like, but you're never going to be a good player when you let koreans play your account to GM, and then post blind all-in guides calling them "GM aggressive play."

On October 23 2011 14:31 oOOoOphidian wrote:
All-inning people who don't expect an all-in is about the summary of this "guide."

Yes, some openers are greedy or metagame an economic zerg, but a proper response and good scouting of your all-in will result in failure every time.

Why do these threads keep getting spammed all over the forum? It is really obnoxious to see huff and puff about absolutely no content.

On October 23 2011 14:45 TangSC wrote:


Everyone seems to think that if Zerg is on the offensive it's an all-in build, and this is the type of misconception about aggressive zerg that I'm trying to argue against. It's not all-in, as long as you have planned followups in the situations where you just do damage but don't end the game. Example: you go for roach ling in ZvT and they get fast tanks and bunker their main. Well, you now can drone behind it and take a 3rd while they take a 2nd, maybe even delay their natural expand with the units you had intended to attack with. It is theoretically true that if you execute an early timing attack and it does no damage, you will be behind in the macro game. But you have to take into account that your attacks will almost always do some measure of damage, and if you can exploit map control and information that aggressive play gives you, you can move into macro games with several advantages.

I think anyone can agree there are pros and cons to aggressive and defensive play styles, and if you choose aggression then that's a viable stylistic choice that shouldn't be labeled so negatively.

On October 23 2011 22:26 GTLAllDayEveryDay wrote:
I've been GM two seaons in a row, in both cases top 75. I played this game enough at a decent level to know VPTangs builds and strategies are gimmicky and akin to 3 rax marine scv all ining and his subsequent "thought" processes as to why he does a certain build never are really truly thought out. For example, he'll go 14/14 vs a terran, throw down a blind roach warren and then find out 30 seconds later that the terran open reactored hellion, and then he'll justify his blind roach warren choice by saying he expected that opening from the terran. Then he'll make a guide on how to do this, citing the 3 out of 12 times it worked. If anyone truly wants to do well in this game and get better and have solid BOs, please never listen to VPTang. He's a self-obsessed mediocre player who thinks hes the next coming of Day9.

edit: Also VPTang is not grandmaster, so he's lying about credentials as well.

On October 23 2011 22:39 Micket wrote:

After watching Sen vs MVP and MVP vs Nestea, it seems like any failed attack resulted in certain doom for the Zerg. You say drone up behind it and take a third, which is what Sen and Nestea did. What did MVP do? Push! And killed them in 1 attack.

It seems like 'aggressive Zerg' relies too much on the opponent being scared and turtling whilst you use the presence of your initial force to take control of the map. You essentially said this, but the map control and army presence doesn't actually exist unless you continue building units, which puts you further behind. I have to say though, most people don't have timings as tight as MVP and most would be scared to push right after they held off an early attack.