|
On October 23 2011 23:06 TangSC wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2011 22:39 Micket wrote:On October 23 2011 14:45 TangSC wrote: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. 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. 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. The fact that Sen and Nestea, two of the best zerg players in SC2, are using aggressive timing attacks in top tournaments only proves that aggressive zerg is a viable and effective style. And I don't think anyone reading this thread is going to play a tournament against MVP, and even if they were, I'd recommend knowing how to put the pressure on.
Do you think this playstyle is at all viable outside of exploiting the metagame? There are some builds like 2 rax and reactor hellion that can be done every game if the map allows, which put pressure on, and clearly not being all in. From what I saw from the ZvT games where Zerg was aggressive, if Zerg attacked with a fair amount of units, did 0 damage and took 0 damage, Zerg was in a rough spot (debatable but there is evidence). Clearly the same is not true with hellions and 2 rax. If hellions run into the natural, see 2 queens and a spine, and retreats, Terran has lost nothing. I feel Zerg simply loses so much by making roaches or banelings for an aggressive purpose.
|
Where is this class, and how do I join it?
|
On October 23 2011 23:14 Micket wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2011 23:06 TangSC wrote:On October 23 2011 22:39 Micket wrote:On October 23 2011 14:45 TangSC wrote: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. 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. 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. The fact that Sen and Nestea, two of the best zerg players in SC2, are using aggressive timing attacks in top tournaments only proves that aggressive zerg is a viable and effective style. And I don't think anyone reading this thread is going to play a tournament against MVP, and even if they were, I'd recommend knowing how to put the pressure on. Do you think this playstyle is at all viable outside of exploiting the metagame? There are some builds like 2 rax and reactor hellion that can be done every game if the map allows, which put pressure on, and clearly not being all in. From what I saw from the ZvT games where Zerg was aggressive, if Zerg attacked with a fair amount of units, did 0 damage and took 0 damage, Zerg was in a rough spot (debatable but there is evidence). Clearly the same is not true with hellions and 2 rax. If hellions run into the natural, see 2 queens and a spine, and retreats, Terran has lost nothing. I feel Zerg simply loses so much by making roaches or banelings for an aggressive purpose.
You should watch more games of DRG, sen, nestea, and losira ^^
|
Awesome stuff. This should bring more attention to aggressive zerg style :D
I have a quick question: is this a real class which provides a real college credit ?
|
Wait, which game did Nestea use aggressive styles of play?
Close positions shattered where he said "all-in or nothing?"
The shakuras game vs mvp where he had 2/2 before attacking?
The rest of blizzcon on shit maps?
Sorry man, but I read the guide, watched the vods and only see cheese.
This is encapsulated for me in your ZvP portion. "Here's losira doing a roach ling allin 6 months ago it must be good. Do this."
|
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.
...
Using this logic no build is an all-in build for Zerg. As a personal friend of ActionJesus himself, I know how he 6 pools and I know most of the tricks he has and almost all of his followups. He always jokes about how 7 pool is his macro opening against Protoss and 6 pool is standard play. And oh yes, he still 6 pools. He can force the game his way with a 6 pool, but it relies so insanely much on punishing the protoss in the early game and maintain that control through out the game. While he might win at the 14 minute mark with a roach push from 2 bases. Then it's still all-in.
But to give feedback on your guide. I think it's a good thing to teach bad players how to execute a proper all-in as one of the first things you do. It gives a new player a good idea of how a build order works and what happens if you change something. Keeps it nice and simple and illustrate the concept of timings beautifully. But you gotta sell it as what it is. All-in designed to hit with a specific timing and punishing specific builds.
|
On October 24 2011 00:07 mnck wrote:Show nested quote +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.
...
Using this logic no build is an all-in build for Zerg. As a personal friend of ActionJesus himself, I know how he 6 pools and I know most of the tricks he has and almost all of his followups. He always jokes about how 7 pool is his macro opening against Protoss and 6 pool is standard play. And oh yes, he still 6 pools. He can force the game his way with a 6 pool, but it relies so insanely much on punishing the protoss in the early game and maintain that control through out the game. While he might win at the 14 minute mark with a roach push from 2 bases. Then it's still all-in. But to give feedback on your guide. I think it's a good thing to teach bad players how to execute a proper all-in as one of the first things you do. It gives a new player a good idea of how a build order works and what happens if you change something. Keeps it nice and simple and illustrate the concept of timings beautifully. But you gotta sell it as what it is. All-in designed to hit with a specific timing and punishing specific builds.
It's funny you mention that, I have a friend who opens 7pool macro against toss almost every game. Not my personal preference but if you can make it work, who's to say it's a bad strategy?
|
Great vid & tutorial! Loved the lecture.
For those of you who are trolling, calling people attention whores, Tang has posted a lot of grest tutorials and guide on TL. As long as he maintains this high, I don't see what there is to complain about.
|
Is this mindset applicable to Terran.. or is it exclusive to zerg?
|
...I really want to go to Waterloo now..
|
On October 24 2011 04:43 ff7legend wrote:
Is this mindset applicable to Terran.. or is it exclusive to zerg?
I think there are always opportunities to put pressure on and be aggressive, but it's a little different with terran and protoss. For zerg you usually have "switch points" where you stop producing drones and start making only units, and then you do a timing attack and either reinforce with units or "switch" again into drones. For toss and terran, it's not ideal to cut workers in MOST situations, as constant worker production is pretty key to economy. However, there are ways to be aggressive while maintaining constant production with Terran.
|
Sure, the play in the videos is arguably a little gimmicky but who is to say that there isn't useful stuff to learn in these guides? If anything, it only shows that one man's "cheese" is another's "aggressive play", and honestly, it seems like a lot of people are getting their backs up and taking offense and for the life of me I can't really understand why.
|
Finally, a Zerg gets it and is useful enough to post a guide. :p
|
I get what you are trying to do with your videos and lessons but coming into chat channels and spamming your content won't make people more likely to watch it. It gets people annoyed with you even before they check out your stuff. Also, you're not GM and idk why you keep saying that you are.
|
I think the only problem with what you're doing is that if you do zero damage (please don't argue by saying you will never do zero damage because that can't be true as with any pressure), you are automatically behind. The other races have the ability to constantly produce workers but with zerg as soon as you build a ton of units, you gave up a ton of drones. If you can ENSURE significant damage, I would consider your play reasonable, but there is no way to, so I must condemn it to simple, though potent, cheese.
|
On October 24 2011 11:09 rancidmeat wrote:
I think the only problem with what you're doing is that if you do zero damage (please don't argue by saying you will never do zero damage because that can't be true as with any pressure), you are automatically behind. The other races have the ability to constantly produce workers but with zerg as soon as you build a ton of units, you gave up a ton of drones. If you can ENSURE significant damage, I would consider your play reasonable, but there is no way to, so I must condemn it to simple, though potent, cheese.
True, there will be times you don't do damage and end up behind. Still, the idea behind the aggressive strategy is to use your information of his tech choice to determine the correct unit composition to attack. Roach or roach/ling openings are guaranteed damage against most hellion openings. You're going to produce some units to defend anyway, the extra units you put into attacking are made up by the fact that you take map control and do some damage. There are a lot of ways to take a 3rd, tech up, drone up, etc while you put on pressure as zerg.
|
you're trying too hard, the only person you'll be known as is that annoying guy who won't shut up about his gm rank and aggressive playstyle
have you tried being a little more subtle?
maybe adding real content to your posts
|
Don't forget his try hard funny warnings.
You would think that considering how much time you put into your guide you would have the decency to remove the clip that drops the N-word. Maybe you're not aware of it, but the N word is still quite offense (not to be so technical but -er is much much worse than -a) and made me cringe. Regardless of the depth of the word, it's pretty unprofessional to have any blatantly clear curse word thrown in EIGHT seconds into the video. - -"
Touching on noxn's jab at your content, I have yet to see any real depth into your posts. They consist to me of first and foremost shameless plugging, useless spoilers, and a bunch of build orders, without any real explanation. It seems to me like you've just taken a vod of an aggressive zerg game, copied the build order, and popped it into your thread. Why do they work? When would a bad time to execute the build? You claim
On October 23 2011 01:50 TangSC wrote:
There's more to it than that, there are subtle bits of information I use to determine whether to attack or macro, and there's more finesse to the execution than just mashing 1 a-move. That's why I'd like to make a distinction between a Blind Cheese and an Aggressive Response.
But you don't explain how in your "guide" you're blindly making units at food counts anyway, where's the "response" element in that?
|
On October 23 2011 02:17 FinestHour wrote:
Too many people stuck with the mindset that zerg has to br the turtley, reactive race. This guide is a great way to change up the playstyle a little. Cool stuff!
Yeah, thats how i play, im gonna start watching the rest of this.
|
On October 23 2011 02:53 Amaterasu1234 wrote:Is Jecho's Roach/ling/bling bust guide appropriate to mention? I don't know if it still works or not... but I don't see why not...and it certainly fits the style of aggressive zerg. ------------ Edit: I noticed you only had the roach/ling push vs 1/3 gate expo in zvp. A lot of pro Z's, when they scout 1 gate FE, will mass ling for 1 minute @ 6 minutes then make a huge attack @ 7 minutes while droning behind it. If the toss doesn't have superb forcefields, lings can take out sentries, deny the expansion, but even win the game right there ((high unlikely). This ling attack only works vs 1 gate expo...3 gate has too many forcefields available, leaving a larger margin of error for the toss and his forcefields.
It was done by goswser on mkp in mlg orlando and looking invinsible...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
