|
On December 06 2011 04:59 AA.spoon wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2011 03:13 IcemanAsi wrote:
Hi,
I'm obviously not gonna argue with NrGmonk who knows about a hundred times more then I do about this game but I want to throw something in here.I found the effective use of the archon toilet to be a huge dissapointment and for me, it completely ruined the game.
This mechanic has been declared by blizzard to be an exploit and I have to say that I agree. Obvisouly the patch implemented in 1.3.0 was ineffective due to air unit scattering slower then ground units. I thought it took all the depth out of the game and turned a balanced beautiful game into a farce.
I don't understand how people who take this game seriously can think that was a proper ending to the game. I want to honestly ask you NrGmonk, didn't you find the use of the archon toilet deplorable? Actually they nerfed archon toilet pretty hard a couple of patches ago. It doesn't work anymore except on broodlords because these are to slow and can't spread out well when the archon toilet finishes. It might seem that mothership counters mass brood, but I am still waiting for a zerg who splits his broods. It always pains me to see 15 broods going into 1 vortex, while with some micro it would have been only 4-5. Having played many pvz 's at high lvl, I can say you mothership is the only solution to >10 broods.
It depends on a lot of things...
Void Rays are great, but if he has infestors you have to spread them, mass blink stalker do still fine vs 10+ broods if there isn't a fuckton of ground troops around and even then there is often terrain that can be abused.
If you want to see a good broodlords split: stephano vs grubby from "Battle in Berlin" (or whatever it was called)
|
United States8476 Posts
On December 06 2011 04:58 K3Nyy wrote:
I really did not like how Brown went for Colo after taking a 3rd. Isn't Blink + 1 Robo for Immortals, Warp Prism and Obs a much better choice? Good Blink micro with FFs really nullifies Roaches and lings from a defensive position. Then you can transition into Colo or whatever.
But I feel like taking a 3rd then going Colo leaves you really vulnerable to aggressive Zergs. They don't even have to win the battle, if they just trade while teching and expanding, it can really leave the Protoss far behind.
I think a big problem with people on the teamliquid strategy forums is that they either swear by colossi or swear against them. Colossi are just as viable as immortal/blink stalker/templar. It's just that both have their strengths and weaknesses. In Brown's specific scenario, I have to absolutely agree with his choice to go colossi. Against a largely ling/infestor into broodlord composition, colossi are infinitely more useful than immortal/twilight tech. The problem is that templar are much further away on the tech tree and if you went for that path, you wouldn't be able to take a 4th as fast nor would you be able to pressure as much as Brown did with just 1 or 2 colossi. In addition, templar alone are worse versus broodlords than colossi alone, so Brown would have been behind in that way as well.
|
Nice writeup, I was thinking about writing an article about this game as well, but you've pretty much got in covered 
One thing I noticed that you forgot to mention is that Brown uses his first Void Ray along with an Observer to clear Creep Tumors. Along with decreasing Overlord vision, this is a great use for a single Void Ray behind a light Stargate pressure. There's really no reason not to do it, and it at the very least it annoys players who skip Hydra when dealing with Stargate (as Losira does most of the time), and will deter any kind of big Hydra aggression as a followup.
I've been having trouble taking a fast third (8-10 mins) behind a Stargate play against Zergs who do low-drone, 3hatch aggression of some kind (Roach/Ling, Roach, Roach/Hydra). I think the map was a major factor in this game, and that can't be stressed enough. In general, though, I had been trying to go Blink before Robo to try and defend my third, but after watching this game I'm pretty convinced that Robo (eventually 2) is the answer. Lots of Observers, a few Immortals into Collosi and a Prism or two for pressure seems to provide the beefiest army, best scouting and harassment potential.
Agree with all the other points for sure:
Love the aggressive expanding, especially against a rushed Hive with mass Spines.
Mothership is definitely the answer to Broods, especially Losira's style that game in which he just masses them behind Spines and Infestors. Against that many Infestors going for Voids is suicide.
Carriers and the Mothership are the most powerful units against Zerg lategame. I don't think Carriers should be part of your first max, but adding them into a remax when you're on 5-6 bases like Brown started to do is very strong. The synergy of a Templar/Carrier army is actually too much for Zerg to deal with IMO.
|
After just having watched the game of Brown vs. LosirA I'm going to play the devils advocate. Im nowhere as good as you guys, so I'll make it short.
The Opening
On such a big map a 20 supply hatchery seems really late.
The midgame
In the midgame (21:15) losira absolutely demolishes the protoss army and then proceeds to what: Max up instead of start punishing the expansions of the protoss. He didn't do well at managing expansions and basically spent the entire game defending instead of trying to hurt the protoss's economy.
Regarding the last engagement
For some reason losira threw additionally units into the vortex. That was a big mistake and probably cost him the game. He's staking too much on beating the deathball without managing. Archon toilet is a bit silly, but zerg players are obviously not spreading out their army enough and should be punished.
The map also plays a BIG factor into how this game went I feel. This map is huuuuuge and this style probably won't work on the smaller maps in the Euro/US tournaments. The ramp before entering Losira's side of the map is also very useful for granting a good platform of attack.
The lategame gets pretty silly once protoss can afford everything, but when the zerg lets the protoss get there it's deserved. Losira is also not using his infestors to kill bases with infested terrans. Brown defends well with cannons, but that's still a huge investment.
|
On December 06 2011 05:07 NrGmonk wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2011 04:58 K3Nyy wrote:
I really did not like how Brown went for Colo after taking a 3rd. Isn't Blink + 1 Robo for Immortals, Warp Prism and Obs a much better choice? Good Blink micro with FFs really nullifies Roaches and lings from a defensive position. Then you can transition into Colo or whatever.
But I feel like taking a 3rd then going Colo leaves you really vulnerable to aggressive Zergs. They don't even have to win the battle, if they just trade while teching and expanding, it can really leave the Protoss far behind. I think a big problem with people on the teamliquid strategy forums is that they either swear by colossi or swear against them. Colossi are just as viable as immortal/blink stalker/templar. It's just that both have their strengths and weaknesses. In Brown's specific scenario, I have to absolutely agree with his choice to go colossi. Against a largely ling/infestor into broodlord composition, colossi are infinitely more useful than immortal/twilight tech. The problem is that templar are much further away on the tech tree and if you went for that path, you wouldn't be able to take a 4th as fast nor would you be able to pressure as much as Brown did with just 1 or 2 colossi. In addition, templar alone are worse versus broodlords than colossi alone, so Brown would have been behind in that way as well.
Hm you are right. I looked at Brown's build without considering Losira. Since he did go ling/infestor, the better choice is definitely Colo. My apologies.
|
I don't think this is really revolutionary. Lots of people do early 3rd, it can be punished. Lots of people make motherships; splitting your army defeats vortex. Carriers actually are a waste of money (Adding more void rays would have been better), and it just reinforces the idea that zerg only needs to make 3/3 corruptors and infestors to beat protoss in the late game...
Glad to see another good protoss re-surface but it's not like his play just created a bunch of hard and fast rules overnight. I like the many-observers idea but I don't think it will catch on either - nor are his ideas totally original. The fake 4zealot poke and the light voidray pheonix into a third is standard play on the ladder for weeks.. And like most expand-behind-soft-contain strats the shit crumbles to the correct roach timings so, I guess we'll have to see if there is actually something to be learned in the coming weeks.
|
Interesting. I skipped watching this set because I thought Losira was going to ROFLstomp Brown but now I will have to check it out ^^
|
|
|
On December 06 2011 04:42 avilo wrote:Finally glad someone wrote a strategy post outlining how useful/good carriers are. It's a misconception they are bad. They aren't. It seems like there is no real good hard counter to a maxed out protoss with mass carriers in PvZ imo...just from games i've seen / played before. The only option for Zerg at that point seems to be "make more corruptors" and have a huge resource bank b4 engages, but naturally protoss will have a good resource bank as well, so I think at that point... It's still a good situation for protoss. Just like TvP, PvZ....if there are vikings left over in the sky after killing all collosus, protoss comes out with an advantage from being able to switch to pure ground remaxes making the remaining vikings useless supply. I'm sure it's the same deal PvZ with carriers vs corruptors. If you lose the carrriers, you remax pure ground and go attack their expansions while they have just the corruptors which don't shoot down...and if you don't lose the carriers...you still win...win win situation. Nice OP, carriers are baller as hell, literally lol. 
If corruptors ever manage to kill the carriers, they turn into broodlords which shoot down, so supply tied up in corruptors isn't a problem after the air is dead. The problem for Z is that it's almost impossible to kill the carriers with storms and archons and vortexes ripping through your corruptors.
But I haven't yet seen a Z max out on corruptors, attack from multiple angles while storm dodging accepting that they're all going to die, then remax instantly on corruptors and attack again quickly so that there aren't vortexes the second time, then run away and morph them into broodlords, and then push.
That's the kind of craziness that it'd take to fight a carrier/mothership/HT/archon deathball. And that's why it feels so good as Protoss to survive the impossible infinity mutalisk to broodlord to ultralisk stages of the game and to finally complete your deathball that you know will win.
|
On December 06 2011 05:07 NrGmonk wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2011 04:58 K3Nyy wrote:
I really did not like how Brown went for Colo after taking a 3rd. Isn't Blink + 1 Robo for Immortals, Warp Prism and Obs a much better choice? Good Blink micro with FFs really nullifies Roaches and lings from a defensive position. Then you can transition into Colo or whatever.
But I feel like taking a 3rd then going Colo leaves you really vulnerable to aggressive Zergs. They don't even have to win the battle, if they just trade while teching and expanding, it can really leave the Protoss far behind. I think a big problem with people on the teamliquid strategy forums is that they either swear by colossi or swear against them. Colossi are just as viable as immortal/blink stalker/templar. It's just that both have their strengths and weaknesses. In Brown's specific scenario, I have to absolutely agree with his choice to go colossi. Against a largely ling/infestor into broodlord composition, colossi are infinitely more useful than immortal/twilight tech. The problem is that templar are much further away on the tech tree and if you went for that path, you wouldn't be able to take a 4th as fast nor would you be able to pressure as much as Brown did with just 1 or 2 colossi. In addition, templar alone are worse versus broodlords than colossi alone, so Brown would have been behind in that way as well.
Actually you can do this with ht tech aswell
Ogsvines does stargate into blink/ht with a 9min third pretty often. By going fast blink you can still be aggressive, although vs ling infestor you probably want charge instead.
Just want to say that its completely fine to get cannons, you have a lot of minerals left anyway. It's basically really important to keep using those minerals to expand, and to defend them with cannons.
|
i wonder how the late game carriers are going to be effective if you are playing mass robo beforehand. where do you take the gas for this and do you actually have enough gas to be getting the air upgrades aswell as the usual ground ones?
i propose favoring shield upgrades along with ground attack and early blink on 2 base would be alot smoother than going double robo.
|
Fantastic write-up, very well-structured and helped me to learned a lot about mid/late game PvZ. As a zerg player I've lost more than a few late-game battles against the almost indestructable carrier/mothership/HT/archon deathball. It's incredibly difficult to deal with, even when maxed out on corruptor/infestor/brood, and hopefully the viper solves this for us.
I think that as soon as zerg gets maxed out, it's time to apply hard pressure to attempt to deny the protoss 3rd/4th expansions. I've seen players get maxed as zerg and begin aggressively spreading creep and a spine/spore wall towards the newer protoss bases and it puts on a lot of pressure.
|
On December 06 2011 02:06 reikai wrote:
I kind of disagree on the voidray into quick third point, if only because of Mondragon. If someone can find the link to that post/pic, you'll know what I'm talking about.
It basically said that if toss uses voids, you can hit a timing and simply make more roaches than that one stargate can even handle.
however, if the zerg plays the counter game like you said and only does the correct UNIT response, then the quick third works. Thoughts?
Well depends on the build of the zerg and the map, but I think Daybreak's layout is good enough?
Great write up Monk. And thanks for pointing out this game, it didn't seem to be too recommended o.o
Edit: lol nvm it is quite recommended =O time to watch!
|
On December 06 2011 05:07 NrGmonk wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2011 04:58 K3Nyy wrote:
I really did not like how Brown went for Colo after taking a 3rd. Isn't Blink + 1 Robo for Immortals, Warp Prism and Obs a much better choice? Good Blink micro with FFs really nullifies Roaches and lings from a defensive position. Then you can transition into Colo or whatever.
But I feel like taking a 3rd then going Colo leaves you really vulnerable to aggressive Zergs. They don't even have to win the battle, if they just trade while teching and expanding, it can really leave the Protoss far behind. I think a big problem with people on the teamliquid strategy forums is that they either swear by colossi or swear against them. Colossi are just as viable as immortal/blink stalker/templar. It's just that both have their strengths and weaknesses. In Brown's specific scenario, I have to absolutely agree with his choice to go colossi. Against a largely ling/infestor into broodlord composition, colossi are infinitely more useful than immortal/twilight tech. The problem is that templar are much further away on the tech tree and if you went for that path, you wouldn't be able to take a 4th as fast nor would you be able to pressure as much as Brown did with just 1 or 2 colossi. In addition, templar alone are worse versus broodlords than colossi alone, so Brown would have been behind in that way as well.
I've largely moved away from colossi for 2 reasons:
(1) the tech path lacks versatility since it's expensive and isn't useful against mutas; and
(2) colossus builds tend to rely on a lot of stalkers, and stalkers are awful.
I've got a spreadsheet that calculates unit strength based on a (slightly complicated) formula involving health, DPS and cost, and it's pretty impressive how crappy stalkers' stats really are. Granted, the chart ignores range and mobility which are the blink stalker's most important attributes, but check out the efficiency numbers based on the raw stats.
-Zerglings are the most cost-efficient unit in the game when you assume all units stand still and are able to attack at the same time, so I've set zergling efficiency at 1 for a benchmark
-Zealots are Protoss's most cost-efficient unit in a straight stand and smash fight at .88, or 88% as cost efficient as a zergling.
-Probes and sentries are Protoss's least efficient combat units at .30 and .26 respectively.
-Stalkers, at .37, have only slightly better stats vs light units than probes. If you've ever 4-gated in PvP and had your stalkers trapped and forced to fight probes, you know you're making an even trade.
You do need some stalkers in PvZ because they're mobile and they shoot up (the mutalisk's efficiency is .31 which is close to the stalker's .37; compare that to the stimmed marine's .63 and you understand why 50 mutas works against P but not T), but IMO, the best way to play macro PvZ is to make as few stalkers as you can get away with.
That said, colossi are pretty good. Is it possible to go colossi without making a shit-ton of stalkers?
|
Just watched the vod, and I think the major lesson I got out of it was not to throw my entire army into a vortex o_O
|
On December 06 2011 06:12 Tobias wrote:
Just watched the vod, and I think the major lesson I got out of it was not to throw my entire army into a vortex o_O
lol i just finished can't believe losira did that haha xD
epic archon toilet, although there was 1 sad archon who didn't get to go in 
(brown u meanie lol)
|
On December 06 2011 06:34 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2011 06:12 Tobias wrote:
Just watched the vod, and I think the major lesson I got out of it was not to throw my entire army into a vortex o_O lol i just finished can't believe losira did that haha xD epic archon toilet, although there was 1 sad archon who didn't get to go in (brown u meanie lol)
uhm.... what else is he going to do with slow ass broodlord who'll die if they try to walk with a cane back to the spines?
Also they can't kill anything since the overseer's in the vortex too. (nor can he see that the archons walked into the vortex -- Hi overseers went into vortex with the corruptors)
|
On December 06 2011 06:06 kcdc wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2011 05:07 NrGmonk wrote:On December 06 2011 04:58 K3Nyy wrote:
I really did not like how Brown went for Colo after taking a 3rd. Isn't Blink + 1 Robo for Immortals, Warp Prism and Obs a much better choice? Good Blink micro with FFs really nullifies Roaches and lings from a defensive position. Then you can transition into Colo or whatever.
But I feel like taking a 3rd then going Colo leaves you really vulnerable to aggressive Zergs. They don't even have to win the battle, if they just trade while teching and expanding, it can really leave the Protoss far behind. I think a big problem with people on the teamliquid strategy forums is that they either swear by colossi or swear against them. Colossi are just as viable as immortal/blink stalker/templar. It's just that both have their strengths and weaknesses. In Brown's specific scenario, I have to absolutely agree with his choice to go colossi. Against a largely ling/infestor into broodlord composition, colossi are infinitely more useful than immortal/twilight tech. The problem is that templar are much further away on the tech tree and if you went for that path, you wouldn't be able to take a 4th as fast nor would you be able to pressure as much as Brown did with just 1 or 2 colossi. In addition, templar alone are worse versus broodlords than colossi alone, so Brown would have been behind in that way as well. I've largely moved away from colossi for 2 reasons: (1) the tech path lacks versatility since it's expensive and isn't useful against mutas; and (2) colossus builds tend to rely on a lot of stalkers, and stalkers are awful. I've got a spreadsheet that calculates unit strength based on a (slightly complicated) formula involving health, DPS and cost, and it's pretty impressive how crappy stalkers' stats really are. Granted, the chart ignores range and mobility which are the blink stalker's most important attributes, but check out the efficiency numbers based on the raw stats. -Zerglings are the most cost-efficient unit in the game when you assume all units stand still and are able to attack at the same time, so I've set zergling efficiency at 1 for a benchmark -Zealots are Protoss's most cost-efficient unit in a straight stand and smash fight at .88, or 88% as cost efficient as a zergling. -Probes and sentries are Protoss's least efficient combat units at .30 and .26 respectively. -Stalkers, at .37, have only slightly better stats vs light units than probes. If you've ever 4-gated in PvP and had your stalkers trapped and forced to fight probes, you know you're making an even trade. You do need some stalkers in PvZ because they're mobile and they shoot up (the mutalisk's efficiency is .31 which is close to the stalker's .37; compare that to the stimmed marine's .63 and you understand why 50 mutas works against P but not T), but IMO, the best way to play macro PvZ is to make as few stalkers as you can get away with. That said, colossi are pretty good. Is it possible to go colossi without making a shit-ton of stalkers?
Care to share the spreadsheet?
I'd like to see a few numbers that I really wonder about, corruptors and immortals for example =)
|
United States8476 Posts
On December 06 2011 05:14 Advocado wrote:+ Show Spoiler +After just having watched the game of Brown vs. LosirA I'm going to play the devils advocate. Im nowhere as good as you guys, so I'll make it short.
The Opening
On such a big map a 20 supply hatchery seems really late.
The midgame
In the midgame (21:15) losira absolutely demolishes the protoss army and then proceeds to what: Max up instead of start punishing the expansions of the protoss. He didn't do well at managing expansions and basically spent the entire game defending instead of trying to hurt the protoss's economy.
Regarding the last engagement
For some reason losira threw additionally units into the vortex. That was a big mistake and probably cost him the game. He's staking too much on beating the deathball without managing. Archon toilet is a bit silly, but zerg players are obviously not spreading out their army enough and should be punished.
The map also plays a BIG factor into how this game went I feel. This map is huuuuuge and this style probably won't work on the smaller maps in the Euro/US tournaments. The ramp before entering Losira's side of the map is also very useful for granting a good platform of attack.
The lategame gets pretty silly once protoss can afford everything, but when the zerg lets the protoss get there it's deserved. Losira is also not using his infestors to kill bases with infested terrans. Brown defends well with cannons, but that's still a huge investment.
You can't get a hatch down before 20 supply versus a competent Protoss. Yes, the map did make a huge difference with this strat.
On December 06 2011 05:27 darkscream wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I don't think this is really revolutionary. Lots of people do early 3rd, it can be punished. Lots of people make motherships; splitting your army defeats vortex. Carriers actually are a waste of money (Adding more void rays would have been better), and it just reinforces the idea that zerg only needs to make 3/3 corruptors and infestors to beat protoss in the late game...
Glad to see another good protoss re-surface but it's not like his play just created a bunch of hard and fast rules overnight. I like the many-observers idea but I don't think it will catch on either - nor are his ideas totally original. The fake 4zealot poke and the light voidray pheonix into a third is standard play on the ladder for weeks.. And like most expand-behind-soft-contain strats the shit crumbles to the correct roach timings so, I guess we'll have to see if there is actually something to be learned in the coming weeks.
Ok it's not super revolutionary. I never said it was; it's just a really great game showcasing some important PvZ concepts people tend to forget. Voidrays are not a better choice than carriers in that late game deathball. Your quote about zerg massing corruptors and infestors is just flat out wrong.
On December 06 2011 05:49 Arcanefrost wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On December 06 2011 05:07 NrGmonk wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2011 04:58 K3Nyy wrote:
I really did not like how Brown went for Colo after taking a 3rd. Isn't Blink + 1 Robo for Immortals, Warp Prism and Obs a much better choice? Good Blink micro with FFs really nullifies Roaches and lings from a defensive position. Then you can transition into Colo or whatever.
But I feel like taking a 3rd then going Colo leaves you really vulnerable to aggressive Zergs. They don't even have to win the battle, if they just trade while teching and expanding, it can really leave the Protoss far behind. I think a big problem with people on the teamliquid strategy forums is that they either swear by colossi or swear against them. Colossi are just as viable as immortal/blink stalker/templar. It's just that both have their strengths and weaknesses. In Brown's specific scenario, I have to absolutely agree with his choice to go colossi. Against a largely ling/infestor into broodlord composition, colossi are infinitely more useful than immortal/twilight tech. The problem is that templar are much further away on the tech tree and if you went for that path, you wouldn't be able to take a 4th as fast nor would you be able to pressure as much as Brown did with just 1 or 2 colossi. In addition, templar alone are worse versus broodlords than colossi alone, so Brown would have been behind in that way as well. Actually you can do this with ht tech aswell Ogsvines does stargate into blink/ht with a 9min third pretty often. By going fast blink you can still be aggressive, although vs ling infestor you probably want charge instead. Just want to say that its completely fine to get cannons, you have a lot of minerals left anyway. It's basically really important to keep using those minerals to expand, and to defend them with cannons.
Ok cool, but my points still stand.
On December 06 2011 05:54 alpenrahm wrote:+ Show Spoiler + i wonder how the late game carriers are going to be effective if you are playing mass robo beforehand. where do you take the gas for this and do you actually have enough gas to be getting the air upgrades aswell as the usual ground ones?
i propose favoring shield upgrades along with ground attack and early blink on 2 base would be alot smoother than going double robo.
You shouldn't really worry about carriers. They're for when you're on 4+ base and have the game won 95%. If you add carriers, you can turn it into 99%.
|
Awesome write up Monk.
After reading your OP it really makes me want to watch the game again with you casting it, play by play.
MAKE IT HAPPEN! *kisses feets*
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
