|
On November 11 2011 03:04 tskarzyn wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2011 18:27 sluggaslamoo wrote:durrrr plays SC2 now? Looks interesting though  durrr's aggression works because he has mastered the fundamentals of the game and has a deep understanding of the standard and non-standard lines his opponents might take in every scenario. blind cheese in sc2 doesn't exactly require much thought.
Agreed, that's why it's important to have clear, planned transitions to all your aggressive attacks.
|
My first thought when I saw this build is that it looked like a zerg 1/1/1 all-in style, which relied on terran not being able to figure which combination of units beats the roaches. I've watched the replays now, and I do think that your opponents don't react properly when they see a lot of roaches, but that's definitely not a fault of your build or playstyle.
I realized after watching your replays that this is a reactive style which exploits certain timing attacks, which is awesome. For example, one game you saw your opponent get a fast starport to get drops in response to your roach-based armies. You immediately put down a spire and kicked out a pack of mutas. That was probably the moment which turned me onto this build. I noticed that you make subtle deviations here and there based on how the game goes, would you be able to elaborate on how this can be a reactive style?
Also, I just wanted your opinion on something. Do you think that this is a standard style which can't be metagamed? Would you do this every game of a a Bo3/5/7 in a tournament? I can't think of something which would excel against this style, but maybe 1 rax in base cc into 3 rax heavy upgrades and 2 fact tanks on 2 base. Or maybe even pure mech so the hellions get the sling/bling and the tanks take the roaches? Perhaps you have friends who metagame your build on ladder?
|
I love doing the first attack you have there, I do it almost exactly the same. If for that first push you attack with the roaches as soon as they pop and rally in the lings, you can get in a little quicker, and sometimes you can just bust with the roaches, then a few seconds later get the lings it, I like doing it that way better, it feels stronger to me.
Having both the lings and the roaches always felt clunky to me, for the early push, but that is just me.
Good build though, gotta love aggressive zerg !
|
On November 11 2011 22:24 TangSC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 03:04 tskarzyn wrote:On November 08 2011 18:27 sluggaslamoo wrote:durrrr plays SC2 now? Looks interesting though durrr's aggression works because he has mastered the fundamentals of the game and has a deep understanding of the standard and non-standard lines his opponents might take in every scenario. blind cheese in sc2 doesn't exactly require much thought. Agreed, that's why it's important to have clear, planned transitions to all your aggressive attacks.
Which with a build like this is hard to do and puts you severely behind if you don't do any damage and he defends perfectly you are going to lose if he plays correctly, the higher level players you play the more you will realize this.
|
On November 12 2011 04:44 blade55555 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 22:24 TangSC wrote:On November 11 2011 03:04 tskarzyn wrote:On November 08 2011 18:27 sluggaslamoo wrote:durrrr plays SC2 now? Looks interesting though durrr's aggression works because he has mastered the fundamentals of the game and has a deep understanding of the standard and non-standard lines his opponents might take in every scenario. blind cheese in sc2 doesn't exactly require much thought. Agreed, that's why it's important to have clear, planned transitions to all your aggressive attacks. Which with a build like this is hard to do and puts you severely behind if you don't do any damage and he defends perfectly you are going to lose if he plays correctly, the higher level players you play the more you will realize this.
Hard to do? This build is designed specifically to help players learn to transition :S You're not severely behind if you don't engage with your first push, as shown in the replay against Painuser and a few of the others. The more you actually try this style and learn to play aggressive, the more you will realize it's a powerful and viable style of play.
|
On November 12 2011 21:56 TangSC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2011 04:44 blade55555 wrote:On November 11 2011 22:24 TangSC wrote:On November 11 2011 03:04 tskarzyn wrote:On November 08 2011 18:27 sluggaslamoo wrote:durrrr plays SC2 now? Looks interesting though durrr's aggression works because he has mastered the fundamentals of the game and has a deep understanding of the standard and non-standard lines his opponents might take in every scenario. blind cheese in sc2 doesn't exactly require much thought. Agreed, that's why it's important to have clear, planned transitions to all your aggressive attacks. Which with a build like this is hard to do and puts you severely behind if you don't do any damage and he defends perfectly you are going to lose if he plays correctly, the higher level players you play the more you will realize this. Hard to do? This build is designed specifically to help players learn to transition :S You're not severely behind if you don't engage with your first push, as shown in the replay against Painuser and a few of the others. The more you actually try this style and learn to play aggressive, the more you will realize it's a powerful and viable style of play.
I never said hard to do this build but it puts you behind economically vs a good terran lol. That is so much larva wasted so early (especially at 7:45...) your tech is behind (muta or if you like infestors infestors) his timing attack can come 2 minutes later and will kill you if you are droning to try and catch up on economy.
My first thought when I saw this build is that it looked like a zerg 1/1/1 all-in style, which relied on terran not being able to figure which combination of units beats the roaches. I've watched the replays now, and I do think that your opponents don't react properly when they see a lot of roaches, but that's definitely not a fault of your build or playstyle.
I realized after watching your replays that this is a reactive style which exploits certain timing attacks, which is awesome. For example, one game you saw your opponent get a fast starport to get drops in response to your roach-based armies. You immediately put down a spire and kicked out a pack of mutas. That was probably the moment which turned me onto this build. I noticed that you make subtle deviations here and there based on how the game goes, would you be able to elaborate on how this can be a reactive style?
Also, I just wanted your opinion on something. Do you think that this is a standard style which can't be metagamed? Would you do this every game of a a Bo3/5/7 in a tournament? I can't think of something which would excel against this style, but maybe 1 rax in base cc into 3 rax heavy upgrades and 2 fact tanks on 2 base. Or maybe even pure mech so the hellions get the sling/bling and the tanks take the roaches? Perhaps you have friends who metagame your build on ladder?
I am going to answer that question of yours about standard style. No this can not be a standard style (doing it every game in a bo5 for example) yes your opponent can punish this build very hard. If you are making units to attack at 7:45 but then retreat because he has the proper army, if you drone to much you will die to his push that comes 2 minutes later (a typical terran timing attack I face is 9:30-10 minutes). He will have stim, siege tanks and you won't have any higher tech then roach/ling/baneling (don't think baneling speed will be done either, especially if you delay lair with this build).
Its a good ladder build until you play people who know you only do this style (which isn't very common to play the same people a ton in a row or something I still play a lot of players I haven't heard of on NA server).
Also note the higher tier players you play the more you will see the weaknesses in this build, especially if they see you are making units and how far behind you will be if they see it coming and defend properly.
|
So, you're still advocating doing an all-in, and then transitioning into 2 more allins after the first one? I don't think this is a good "guide" for players to follow if they want to learn ZvT or improve as a player.
You can get some nice "ladder" wins though, aka imaginary points that mean nothing and just boost your ego.
All the Terran has to do is leave 2 bunkers up at his natural and you are way behind every game.
edit: ah, blade above me said similar. It's not a "build," it's just all-in, transitioning into another all-in, transitioning into another all-in. Like blade said as well, it's nice to acquire imaginary ladder points that mean nothing and temporarily boost your ego, but it's not going to help you improve as a player.
Also, the reason this is not a "build" is because everything, like most all-ins, hinges on you doing damage with the first all-in to either drone behind, or just follow it up with another...you're just throwing units at your opponent and basically hoping it works. If an all-in succeeds, you can essentially do whatever the hell you want after that, you don't need to write an entire guide for what you specifically do after all-inning lol.
You might catch off guard some players better than yourself on ladder with this while they are practicing different things, but in a tournament someone is just going to build 2 bunkers against you and essentially freewin.
With that said, this is a great "build" for people to boost their egos temporarily.
|
also plz stop to spam every public bnet channel with ur free coaching thingy, its very annoying and made me leave the NA server today. when i hopped on europe and noticed your sitting thre in every public channels, i just had to leave them in order not to flame you. i dont kow if you are just trolling there and want ppl to get angry or if you are actually serious.
|
On November 13 2011 09:03 avilo wrote:
Also, the reason this is not a "build" is because everything, like most all-ins, hinges on you doing damage with the first all-in to either drone behind, or just follow it up with another...you're just throwing units at your opponent and basically hoping it works. If an all-in succeeds, you can essentially do whatever the hell you want after that, you don't need to write an entire guide for what you specifically do after all-inning lol.
I'm not taking any sides in this argument but...
Creating any unit in the game in the early/mid game essentially means you're putting yourself behind because they're not drones. Making units early on and attacking isn't a bad thing to try though. I don't agree you should do it every game but players saying you shouldn't at all are wrong.
I mean there's nothing wrong with being passive, but there's nothing wrong with being aggressive either. I don't agree that players should blindly do any kinda aggressive build without scouting because players can counter it. And the only reason you could get away with doing an all in without scouting is if you're abusing the meta game or getting lucky.
Players will have different aims and goals while playing starcraft, some to achieve ladder points and some to get better at the game ect... These aggressive/ all in builds can be good for any aim/goal if the player approaches the style in the right way.
|
Has some similarities to another build I read a long time ago, by JEcho? I know roach/ling/bling is nothing new but it reminded me of it  Same idea with the +1 lining up with Bane speed/roach speed, but contingent on whether or not the T actually expanded; at the same time grab your third + spire. Back then it didn't receive such a chilly reception haha
edit: found the old thread
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=225571
Also, thanks for the writeup. For the vast vast majority of players who play extremely casually it's not a bad place to start to learn timings, line up larvae injects etc. With the popularity of hellion openers this always guarantees you don't die straight up lol, and some pushes still come around that time, in which you'll need units anyway.
|
This is cool stuff, I like the idea of barely getting saturation and using roaches to be more aggressive.
|
On November 13 2011 08:39 blade55555 wrote:
I am going to answer that question of yours about standard style. No this can not be a standard style (doing it every game in a bo5 for example) yes your opponent can punish this build very hard. If you are making units to attack at 7:45 but then retreat because he has the proper army, if you drone to much you will die to his push that comes 2 minutes later (a typical terran timing attack I face is 9:30-10 minutes). He will have stim, siege tanks and you won't have any higher tech then roach/ling/baneling (don't think baneling speed will be done either, especially if you delay lair with this build).
Its a good ladder build until you play people who know you only do this style (which isn't very common to play the same people a ton in a row or something I still play a lot of players I haven't heard of on NA server).
Also note the higher tier players you play the more you will see the weaknesses in this build, especially if they see you are making units and how far behind you will be if they see it coming and defend properly.
I agree with you. I was asking because I wanted Tang's opinion on this; I don't see this to be a style which could be a standard style or win a Bo5 with every game. I'm not sure exactly what the opponents do wrong, but there were games (like against Avilo) where there were a lot of bunkers and Tang still managed to pull off the win. In my opinion, the problem is likely a combination of not scouting roaches and the fact that roaches do well against the hellions that the opponents produced in all of these games. I think marines in bunkers alone could hold the first all in and marine/tank should be able to handle the rest.
This style doesn't exploit the macro advantages of the zerg race to their fullest either. I think that it might be incorrect to go for the 3 tank timing attack at 10 minutes. Just expand and then mass tanks and expand again. If the opponent commits to an engagement at any point, the terran should come out pretty far ahead. Terran doesn't need to attack because zerg isn't taking a lot of bases, powering drones or teching. Why bother attacking if you're already ahead?
Anyhow, I would still like to see what Tang thinks if he sees this
|
On November 13 2011 15:36 Fuhrmaaj wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2011 08:39 blade55555 wrote:
I am going to answer that question of yours about standard style. No this can not be a standard style (doing it every game in a bo5 for example) yes your opponent can punish this build very hard. If you are making units to attack at 7:45 but then retreat because he has the proper army, if you drone to much you will die to his push that comes 2 minutes later (a typical terran timing attack I face is 9:30-10 minutes). He will have stim, siege tanks and you won't have any higher tech then roach/ling/baneling (don't think baneling speed will be done either, especially if you delay lair with this build).
Its a good ladder build until you play people who know you only do this style (which isn't very common to play the same people a ton in a row or something I still play a lot of players I haven't heard of on NA server).
Also note the higher tier players you play the more you will see the weaknesses in this build, especially if they see you are making units and how far behind you will be if they see it coming and defend properly. I agree with you. I was asking because I wanted Tang's opinion on this; I don't see this to be a style which could be a standard style or win a Bo5 with every game. I'm not sure exactly what the opponents do wrong, but there were games (like against Avilo) where there were a lot of bunkers and Tang still managed to pull off the win. In my opinion, the problem is likely a combination of not scouting roaches and the fact that roaches do well against the hellions that the opponents produced in all of these games. I think marines in bunkers alone could hold the first all in and marine/tank should be able to handle the rest. This style doesn't exploit the macro advantages of the zerg race to their fullest either. I think that it might be incorrect to go for the 3 tank timing attack at 10 minutes. Just expand and then mass tanks and expand again. If the opponent commits to an engagement at any point, the terran should come out pretty far ahead. Terran doesn't need to attack because zerg isn't taking a lot of bases, powering drones or teching. Why bother attacking if you're already ahead? Anyhow, I would still like to see what Tang thinks if he sees this
Oh I agree the better response for the terran would be to macro a bigger army and take another base and just secure his win because odds are zergs who do attacks like it normally will do another so why not just guarantee the win? I completely agree but if you are trying to go into a macro game after this fails and he does that push you lose due to droning and not making units, and if you make units and he doesn't attack well you are even further behind then before because you had already sacrificed so many drones and sacrificing more in hopes to take down his follow up attack is a huge risk.
|
On November 13 2011 09:13 Bad_Habit wrote:
also plz stop to spam every public bnet channel with ur free coaching thingy, its very annoying and made me leave the NA server today. when i hopped on europe and noticed your sitting thre in every public channels, i just had to leave them in order not to flame you. i dont kow if you are just trolling there and want ppl to get angry or if you are actually serious.
This is funny from a guy coming from GM by rushing haha (not trying to say that rushing takes no skill, not trying to attack you, not trying to be offensive, etc. just FYI) but anyways pretty sure he's serious since coaching gets you money and money is srs bznz =O
Anyway I agree i don't think this is a good way for newer zergs to learn, I mean I think one reason why people like zerg is cus it's reactionary and you don't need "build orders"
|
i'm been in the shadows lurking every tangsc thread and thinking of a reason why "higher" level people bash his aggressive builds. My thoughts are:
(1) People consider that his builds are only "all-in", meaning that his attacks have only one goal: cripple the enemy. Yes he can macro behind it, but if his all-in fails he is already at a disadvantage and has to play behind.
(2) Some good builds/openings use timing attacks in order to either take map control, tech up, or expand. So if you don't end the game you are ahead or in a good position. His builds don't do something useful enough behind the aggression that he does.
(3) However, from my experience, reactive all-ins are good/strong since it exploits a certain weakness in the build of the opponent. An example of this is when you roach ling or baneling bust a 1 rax cc terran.
So why don't people like Tang's builds? Are Tang's builds:
1. Blind All-in
2. Blind timing attacks that don't help you get ahead unless you cripple the opponent
3. Reactive all-in
4. Good valid one game strategies that can be used but aren't jump off points for macroing/improving your game
|
On November 13 2011 09:03 avilo wrote:
So, you're still advocating doing an all-in, and then transitioning into 2 more allins after the first one? I don't think this is a good "guide" for players to follow if they want to learn ZvT or improve as a player.
You can get some nice "ladder" wins though, aka imaginary points that mean nothing and just boost your ego.
All the Terran has to do is leave 2 bunkers up at his natural and you are way behind every game.
edit: ah, blade above me said similar. It's not a "build," it's just all-in, transitioning into another all-in, transitioning into another all-in. Like blade said as well, it's nice to acquire imaginary ladder points that mean nothing and temporarily boost your ego, but it's not going to help you improve as a player.
Also, the reason this is not a "build" is because everything, like most all-ins, hinges on you doing damage with the first all-in to either drone behind, or just follow it up with another...you're just throwing units at your opponent and basically hoping it works. If an all-in succeeds, you can essentially do whatever the hell you want after that, you don't need to write an entire guide for what you specifically do after all-inning lol.
You might catch off guard some players better than yourself on ladder with this while they are practicing different things, but in a tournament someone is just going to build 2 bunkers against you and essentially freewin.
With that said, this is a great "build" for people to boost their egos temporarily.
Why would ladder be any different from a tournament? If it can catch a person off-guard on ladder, it can certainly do the same in a tournament.
Ladder points do matter, they are not "imaginary", and yes, they boost your ego. What's wrong with that? Having more confidence improves your play overall.
Yes, this build is easy to defend once you see it. However, if this is your first time playing against it, then it can win you games. It's like every other cheese. That said, cheeses can be useful to have in tournaments.
|
On November 13 2011 18:08 pedsky wrote:
i'm been in the shadows lurking every tangsc thread and thinking of a reason why "higher" level people bash his aggressive builds. My thoughts are:
(1) People consider that his builds are only "all-in", meaning that his attacks have only one goal: cripple the enemy. Yes he can macro behind it, but if his all-in fails he is already at a disadvantage and has to play behind.
(2) Some good builds/openings use timing attacks in order to either take map control, tech up, or expand. So if you don't end the game you are ahead or in a good position. His builds don't do something useful enough behind the aggression that he does.
(3) However, from my experience, reactive all-ins are good/strong since it exploits a certain weakness in the build of the opponent. An example of this is when you roach ling or baneling bust a 1 rax cc terran.
So why don't people like Tang's builds? Are Tang's builds:
1. Blind All-in
2. Blind timing attacks that don't help you get ahead unless you cripple the opponent
3. Reactive all-in
4. Good valid one game strategies that can be used but aren't jump off points for macroing/improving your game
For this one I chose number 2.
Am I right? did I win something?!
|
On November 13 2011 18:30 NeonFox wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2011 18:08 pedsky wrote:
i'm been in the shadows lurking every tangsc thread and thinking of a reason why "higher" level people bash his aggressive builds. My thoughts are:
(1) People consider that his builds are only "all-in", meaning that his attacks have only one goal: cripple the enemy. Yes he can macro behind it, but if his all-in fails he is already at a disadvantage and has to play behind.
(2) Some good builds/openings use timing attacks in order to either take map control, tech up, or expand. So if you don't end the game you are ahead or in a good position. His builds don't do something useful enough behind the aggression that he does.
(3) However, from my experience, reactive all-ins are good/strong since it exploits a certain weakness in the build of the opponent. An example of this is when you roach ling or baneling bust a 1 rax cc terran.
So why don't people like Tang's builds? Are Tang's builds:
1. Blind All-in
2. Blind timing attacks that don't help you get ahead unless you cripple the opponent
3. Reactive all-in
4. Good valid one game strategies that can be used but aren't jump off points for macroing/improving your game For this one I chose number 2. Am I right? did I win something?!
You win my blessing!
On November 13 2011 17:21 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2011 09:13 Bad_Habit wrote:
also plz stop to spam every public bnet channel with ur free coaching thingy, its very annoying and made me leave the NA server today. when i hopped on europe and noticed your sitting thre in every public channels, i just had to leave them in order not to flame you. i dont kow if you are just trolling there and want ppl to get angry or if you are actually serious. This is funny from a guy coming from GM by rushing haha (not trying to say that rushing takes no skill, not trying to attack you, not trying to be offensive, etc. just FYI) but anyways pretty sure he's serious since coaching gets you money and money is srs bznz =O Anyway I agree i don't think this is a good way for newer zergs to learn, I mean I think one reason why people like zerg is cus it's reactionary and you don't need "build orders"
I disagree. Zergs have build orders in all match ups. The early game is a reactionary part that I can agree but once you hit lair tech its really up to you on what you want to go and you should always have a plan like infestors, muta/ling/bane, etc . I just disagree with your statement saying they dont' need "build orders" because a zerg playing without a build and just playing reactionary is playing wrong imo.
|
On November 13 2011 09:13 Bad_Habit wrote:
also plz stop to spam every public bnet channel with ur free coaching thingy, its very annoying and made me leave the NA server today. when i hopped on europe and noticed your sitting thre in every public channels, i just had to leave them in order not to flame you. i dont kow if you are just trolling there and want ppl to get angry or if you are actually serious.
i love how he never responds to any of these posts. its quite depressing.
|
On November 13 2011 18:28 kofman wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2011 09:03 avilo wrote:
So, you're still advocating doing an all-in, and then transitioning into 2 more allins after the first one? I don't think this is a good "guide" for players to follow if they want to learn ZvT or improve as a player.
You can get some nice "ladder" wins though, aka imaginary points that mean nothing and just boost your ego.
All the Terran has to do is leave 2 bunkers up at his natural and you are way behind every game.
edit: ah, blade above me said similar. It's not a "build," it's just all-in, transitioning into another all-in, transitioning into another all-in. Like blade said as well, it's nice to acquire imaginary ladder points that mean nothing and temporarily boost your ego, but it's not going to help you improve as a player.
Also, the reason this is not a "build" is because everything, like most all-ins, hinges on you doing damage with the first all-in to either drone behind, or just follow it up with another...you're just throwing units at your opponent and basically hoping it works. If an all-in succeeds, you can essentially do whatever the hell you want after that, you don't need to write an entire guide for what you specifically do after all-inning lol.
You might catch off guard some players better than yourself on ladder with this while they are practicing different things, but in a tournament someone is just going to build 2 bunkers against you and essentially freewin.
With that said, this is a great "build" for people to boost their egos temporarily. Why would ladder be any different from a tournament? If it can catch a person off-guard on ladder, it can certainly do the same in a tournament. Ladder points do matter, they are not "imaginary", and yes, they boost your ego. What's wrong with that? Having more confidence improves your play overall. Yes, this build is easy to defend once you see it. However, if this is your first time playing against it, then it can win you games. It's like every other cheese. That said, cheeses can be useful to have in tournaments.
When you're on ladder you're typically playing people you don't recognize, so they won't know your specific styles. If you continually play the Playhem Dailies everyone is going to know you as a cheeser. I lost to Tang the first time we played because I had no clue of his strats. Unfortunately haven't had a chance to play again, but if we do, I would just pick a build that sacrifices a bit of econ for safety, and force him to beat me in a macro game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
