EPT[G] Stalkerless PvZ - Page 2
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
Trumpstyle
Sweden114 Posts
| ||
|
blade55555
United States17423 Posts
On January 05 2012 09:24 Trumpstyle wrote: Not 100% sure, but I can see mass hydras beating this easily, storm is not that great against hydras and you can't stop creep spread making storm even worse. The hydras will kill all interceptors almost instantly and its over. I actually think you are incorrect on storm not being that great vs Hydra's. Vs roaches I can agree but storm does very, very well vs Hydra's unless you just storm and don't hit any of them but storm is very effective vs hydra's trust me on that :D. I can tell by reading this I hate the build because it has a mothership (by hate I mean I don't want to face it I hate motherships so annoying to face as a zerg player ^^). | ||
|
Shield
Bulgaria4824 Posts
| ||
|
Geiko
France1939 Posts
On January 05 2012 09:33 darkness wrote: We all used to think the mothership is retarded, but there are builds with it now haha. I'm still skeptical that (zerglings+)blings or mutas might work vs this though. :/ Good point, I don't think you mention it in the guide kcdc, how do you deal with ling/baneling without sentries ? | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
what I'm wondering though... how do you deal with dropstyles like they were common before mutas became common? it sounds like without blink stalkers and already having a hard time at those timings around taking a third it should be one of the strongest builds to prevent this style from kicking in. | ||
|
aviator116
United States820 Posts
On January 05 2012 07:43 Lebzetu wrote: Immortal/Storm/Void? Seems gas intensive. I bet Roach/Hydra would just roll this over. And later on when you get CARRIERS and Motherships? Yeah, Hydra/Mass infested terrans. What are you going to do when i mass infested terrans under your carriers? Run? Then you lose your third. If you stay, you get fungaled as my infeseted terran DPS works away at your carriers. why don't you watch the replays instead of theory-crafting? | ||
|
firehand101
Australia3152 Posts
On January 05 2012 07:32 ToastieNL wrote: So, read it through, and I might be rediculous, but; Mass Queen + Neural + Corruptor? Hell, even MASS Neural, as supply permits, though that miught be gimmicky Mass neural? i dont really think thats a viable option anymore. I have seen this build used by a lot of chinese players, it looks really effective. Very hard to pull off though, gl hf! | ||
|
Corsica
Ukraine1854 Posts
 125/50 is too much. Me like like Will try this BO! | ||
|
Br3ezy
United States720 Posts
On January 05 2012 09:03 kcdc wrote: See guide. Storm finishes at 11 min if you do everything right. Which I'm sure doesn't happen in any of the replays, but I might have gotten close. For the sake of making this guide better and to procrastinate homework, I downloaded the first replay. I was pleased coz it was on antiga shipyard which I had a feeling it would be. + Show Spoiler + Anyways moving onto the game, to be more specific, the zerg starts his third expansion after getting speed, which is delayed compared to a non-gas double expansion (by about 20-30 seconds). Fast forward to where you have zealots out on the map, and I can see that the zerg is going for some sort of unorthodox economic build, where instead of making a roach warren to defend against zealot pressure, he chooses to make mass lings which sets him back economically. Anyways good job, you have the advantage now as you start your nexus at approximately 11 minutes. At the exact time that your nexus starts, the zerg is floating roughly 1.4k minerals. If somehow, you were matched up with a superior zerg player that could utilize his economy more effeciently, do you see a way to stop 1,000 minerals more worth of units (40 lings) At this point, the zerg can only hope that he has the superior game knowledge and that he will be able to come back from a disadvantage, which is not the case. You don't make any major mistakes, and you take control of the game and win. I sort of stop watching halfway through because at this point, you have had a more superior economy and you now have been given the opportunity to make those gas expensive units and the zerg's best chance is to go for hive tech, but instead he maxes on lair units instead for unknown reasons. GG Anyways ignoring the first game and moving onto the second game, ZvP on Tal Darim (this will be good, I can just tell). + Show Spoiler + Moving onto the 2nd game, I see that this zerg has also chosen an inferior based strategy in which to play a ZvP on Tal Darim. At the 11:45 mark, where you take your third base, you are up by 10 supply and you are economically ahead by keeping him on 2 bases which is great! I guess a better way to put it is, if you can keep a zerg 2 base on 2 base, you have an advantage and with this advantage, you can choose to go for a stalkerless deathball. At this point, you still stay ahead of this zerg in supply and this zerg is just falling farther behind by the second now because he didn't set himself up for a strong mid game and choose to sacrifice economy to, well not even speed his tech up, but chooses to stay even bases with you. GG Moving onto the third game, wait scratch that the fourth game (I don't like the map entombed valley so I don't want to wtach that game. I will watch it later if I need to support my post though.) I think Antiga is a great map for ZvP by the way. For future reference, if you see a depot outside of your ramp, the map is most likely MLG Antiga Shipyards which only spawns cross positions. + Show Spoiler + So no early aggression, great game so far. The only blunder I see is that this time, the zerg chooses to take his third expansion at 6:41. I have no authority when I say this, but why does he take his third expansion so late? My immediate thoughts are early game aggression, teching before taking a third, droning up harder then you could ever possibly drone up, pylon blocking third base. Unfortunately, none of these situations happens and all you did was forge FE. Being in an economically inferior position, this cuts down the zerg's choice of strategy and how well they can control the game. Also on a side note, with no overlord to even scout your base and a roach warren that is done at 8:16, what exactly is the purpose of it? Maybe to fight off 9 minute +1 zealot pushes or something funky like that i guess? only my speculations At the 10 minute mark, another anaylsis of what situation of the zerg is in is not too bright. The economy count is 50 probes to 53 drones, so you must have done almost unreal damage with those zealots and that void ray or the zerg became scared and made too many units, or just made the wrong units at the wrong time; no matter. Disregarding that last little thought ^ it appears that this zerg chooses to choose a tech fast option opting for faster tech, at a price to his economy(drone count) for reasons that are not clear to me because his lair finishes at 11:40. Your third is on the way of going up, you have high templar out, and the zerg...just finished his lair. The importance of a fast lair may not seem logical to the zerg player, but it appears very logical to me. If a protoss has void rays out on the field, wouldn't you want to get some sort of units (lair tech) that can fight the void rays off offensively? I know this may seem crazy and is certainly going out on a lim here, if the zerg gets a really late lair, he won't really be able to pressure you as long as the void rays aren't microed into spores or excess queens. Also i'd like to point out that while your third base is buildling, the zerg player's macro slips somewhat. Some noticeable mistakes I see is that he is at 117/184 supply (thats at least 5 overlords or 500 minerals he doesn't need right away) and that he has let his macro slip but I assume he had a good reason for that like he was switching techs from lings to hydralisks or something of the likes. I am not going to watch the rest of this game, because already the zerg chose to use an inferior opening and as a result, lets develop such a powerful deathball. After watching 3/7 of your replays (42.8% to be exact), I'd like to point out some similarities that I saw that these zergs were doing that makes your stalkerless pvz work. - The zerg player chooses an inferior build and as a result, falls behind economically - The zerg player might benefit from spending his money faster. They always get rid of their money, but I don't think they are spending it at critical moments (for example floating past 1k minerals at the 11 minute mark) So after watching the replays and gathering information about how this kind of PvZ actaully works, some clarifications on actually making this style to work would be -to delay the zerg's third base for no beneficial gain to the zerg player so that you can take an economic lead with a FFE. -to do enough damage and scare the zerg into making excess units so that he doesn't drone and as a result, falls behind economically Thank you for reading this and I hope this helps to make your build easier to understand in case the guide did not make sense during some points when individuals were reading it. | ||
|
Markwerf
Netherlands3728 Posts
I do this zealot + voidray push in all my games but I just chrono the zealots itself instead of the upgrade. You only need to push with around 5 zealots and a void and you can achieve that far quicker without warpgate but just chronoing from 1 gate. This way you save yourself the trouble of getting a proxy pylon up which can be very hard agianst zergs patrolling their lings correctly. The pylon is also just lost if the zerg responds correctly, ie. making roaches. Relying on 1 or 2 zealots, that won't have +1 yet, to secure a proxy pylon is very unreliable. If zerg micro's correctly he can kill them with just 6-8 lings which he might have. Not having to need warpgate super fast also has the benefit that you don't need wg tech super fast. You can start +1 weapons before the cyber finishes and put stargate down after cyber and THEN get warpgate, it's faster that way. As for the quick templar's i'm not so sure if I like that. Templar tech is simply much harder to fight attrition wars with then colossi. I'd rather just go colossi first and then proceed to the other techs. | ||
|
kcdc
United States2311 Posts
Haven't played against them much, but they die instantly to storms, and they're not that good against zealots. If the zealots are spread-microed, banelings are actually terrible against them. If you see them coming, they should be much weaker than the same money in roaches would be. Re: drops Drops are pretty good against this. Usually, Z will go for a roach/hydra frontal bust, and if that fails, they'll transition to drops. In my experience, you can afford to take some damage in this window because the end-game comp is just so strong, but drops are definitely pretty good because zealot warp-ins and void rays aren't always enough to deal with drops cleanly. | ||
|
Geiko
France1939 Posts
On January 05 2012 09:54 kcdc wrote: Re: banelings Haven't played against them much, but they die instantly to storms, and they're not that good against zealots. If the zealots are spread-microed, banelings are actually terrible against them. If you see them coming, they should be much weaker than the same money in roaches would be. Re: drops Drops are pretty good against this. Usually, Z will go for a roach/hydra frontal bust, and if that fails, they'll transition to drops. In my experience, you can afford to take some damage in this window because the end-game comp is just so strong, but drops are definitely pretty good because zealot warp-ins and void rays aren't always enough to deal with drops cleanly. I haven't played much against this style, so I'm willing to take anything you say for granted, but are storms really that good against the "baneling rain" strats ? ( overlord drops of baneling on your main army ) | ||
|
kcdc
United States2311 Posts
On January 05 2012 09:48 Markwerf wrote: I really like this sentryless style with an emphasis on zealots and upgrades. I do this zealot + voidray push in all my games but I just chrono the zealots itself instead of the upgrade. You only need to push with around 5 zealots and a void and you can achieve that far quicker without warpgate but just chronoing from 1 gate. This way you save yourself the trouble of getting a proxy pylon up which can be very hard agianst zergs patrolling their lings correctly. The pylon is also just lost if the zerg responds correctly, ie. making roaches. Relying on 1 or 2 zealots, that won't have +1 yet, to secure a proxy pylon is very unreliable. If zerg micro's correctly he can kill them with just 6-8 lings which he might have. Not having to need warpgate super fast also has the benefit that you don't need wg tech super fast. You can start +1 weapons before the cyber finishes and put stargate down after cyber and THEN get warpgate, it's faster that way. As for the quick templar's i'm not so sure if I like that. Templar tech is simply much harder to fight attrition wars with then colossi. I'd rather just go colossi first and then proceed to the other techs. You can do a 5 zealot + void ray push with +1 off of 1 gate, but I think the way that is laid out in this guide is better. This way gets you 3 gates and the ability to reinforce at the point of your attack so that if there's an opening, you can win the game right there. It's sort of like a PvT FE where you delay units to set up your production and then have a production burst right after WG tech finishes. This gives you extra production capacity and flexibility. You're right that you can transition from this push into colossus, and that's a strong strategy as well. It's definitely easier to secure your third against roach-hydra, but it's not as good against a 3-base muta transition, and it puts you in a weaker position for the hive-tech phase of the game. I use both strategies, but they have different advantages. | ||
|
ToastieNL
Netherlands845 Posts
I still think the best you can do vs this: - Spread yourself the fuck out. Multipronged attacks. the less bally the army is, the better. - Hydradefense on creep with fungal support, a lot of micro and a remax (you should afford that) - Mass Queen (+Corruptor Maybe) because of Transfuse Or, my favorite - ±20 Corruptors in Magic Boxed mode OVER the Protoss army. Reason: A) Vortex vortexes the Protoss too, allowing the Zerg army to get a good position with Hydra and Queen (as in, IN the vortex, so they are spread out under the air units; immune to most of splash, targeting, feedback and all in range) B) Protoss loses the power of Storm C) Corruptors are pretty good when microed to use their ability on Carries/Mommaship and focus fire. I think those are the best options. Mass Ling/Hydra drops may be very good too. | ||
|
kcdc
United States2311 Posts
On January 05 2012 09:58 Geiko wrote: I haven't played much against this style, so I'm willing to take anything you say for granted, but are storms really that good against the "baneling rain" strats ? ( overlord drops of baneling on your main army ) No, storms aren't very good against overlords. I was responding to a question about playing vs banelings without sentries, so I was thinking of banelings on the ground. I haven't played this against baneling bombing yet, but baneling bombs are mostly strong against sentries, and this build doesn't get sentries. Maybe there's a timing where it'd be good, but I haven't had a Z try it yet. | ||
|
NB
Netherlands12045 Posts
think about it like this. you are slowly stacking all of your gas from the very beginning of the game by making them air so its really hard to lose them. Then you tech to immortal which is also hard to kill and finally go into storm which is a guarantee dmg even if you lose the HT. Yes late game it will be so strong and almost unstoppable. But imagine something like a 3 hatches speed roach all-in ignoring the DPS of VR and keep trading roaches for nexus (aka mondragon guide to ZvP) would simply crush this game plan from the root. another problem i have that you forgot to mention is mineral dump. As protoss, there are only 2 reasonable mineral dumb: expand-cannon or zealot. "couple of cannons at strategic location" is a very misleading term bc it underestimate how IMPORTANT it is. What is 'over cannoning'? What is 'good location'? Not even counting the fact that if you are aiming for a late game army, you should have a different alternative version of each map. For example if i was playing on Shatter temple, in a split map situation, it would be 6 bases i could take in total while on taldarim its 8 and on xelnaga its 4.5(gold has less resources). This result different gas income and require different cannon placements for different base structure. The 2nd flaw i saw i this build is the mobility of your army. Hydra drop, nydus... late game cracklings on taldarim, how could you possibly expand? Storm? The more you spread out, the smaller and the less concentrate your army is, the less effective it get. This simply show how important your cannon placement must be to fence off all the attack angle that zerg could possibly pull off. 3rd point: you simply didnt know the counter to the build yourself or you choose to hide it. Which ever the reason is, there is no 'perfect' build order in any point inside an RTS game. There are always window timings open left and right, accordingly to the level of the players. On top of my head right now some sort of defensive infestor play into mid game muta switch could overwhelm the build but thats not the point. I hope you could provide some replays that you play evenly with a zerg and i want to see how do you transition late game. The longest replay among the one you post is vs Clashdrone. I do talk to the guy in a daily basis and did watch the replay. Now let take a look at the 11->12 min mark. He forced you to cancel you nexus twice. I was watching the game in your vision and thought that you were barely winning until the 14 mins mark to get the nexus up (after the 1st hydra wave) but then i pause the game and turn on everyone vision. Zerg has 2k mineral with all of his queens 90+ energy. imagine all those bunch put into units, you prob should not even stay alive. Infact, if he did a commit roach lings all in around 11 min mark after force cancel on your 3rd. it would totally been his game since he could ramke and rally them so fast compare to your. The general result would be you losing your nature and last with 4 VR which you cant counter attack with. You might storm the lings roach attack at max twice and thats it. Now into the good point of the guide. I like the idea of getting early storm and has been toying with it a lot in the past. The problem is that each storm spent needed to be really cost/effective and to do that you need to be in a perfect place in a perfect time in every battle. Its like seigtank in a way but you only get 1 shot. I have been testing it with prism but my apm isnt that good to make it effective yet. Using this style i think instead of using cannon, you should make more than 1 prism to turn the option of instant counter attack on. This means that every time the roach hydra army move out, Zerg will have to face a chance of having +1 zealot in their main killing drones and tech while P could defend simply using storm and VR. I have tried this style since plexa shock and awe post but it really hard to tweak with vs the recent rise of muta lings. oh yeah muta lings. Even though you said this build provide the road to phoenix, there is no freaking way you could counter the initial muta without preemptively building phoenix (which you are not simply bc of gas into muta and VR). Not even counting a roach switch from the initial muta will screw thing up bc it take much longer for a non-gateway-based army to react compare to zerg. Overall: good build. not enough information in the guide to apply in high level. Extremely hard and fragile to execute without a perfect mechanic (see sair-reaver for more information). Risky. | ||
|
Erasme
Bahamas15899 Posts
| ||
|
Glon
United States569 Posts
User was warned for this post | ||
|
Markwerf
Netherlands3728 Posts
On January 05 2012 10:07 kcdc wrote: You can do a 5 zealot + void ray push with +1 off of 1 gate, but I think the way that is laid out in this guide is better. This way gets you 3 gates and the ability to reinforce at the point of your attack so that if there's an opening, you can win the game right there. It's sort of like a PvT FE where you delay units to set up your production and then have a production burst right after WG tech finishes. This gives you extra production capacity and flexibility. You're right that you can transition from this push into colossus, and that's a strong strategy as well. It's definitely easier to secure your third against roach-hydra, but it's not as good against a 3-base muta transition, and it puts you in a weaker position for the hive-tech phase of the game. I use both strategies, but they have different advantages. Hmm I don't think the way it's laid out in the guide is just better. I've checked most of your reps and compared with a couple of myself and I notice that I push with 4 zealots and a void at their third around 8:00 average while you tend to push around 8:45-9:00 albeit with maybe 1 or 2 zealots more. I think that timing difference is quite crucial because in that time between 8 and 9 mins it's often when they expect pressure and tend to get roaches up, get a queen at their third, make units etc. A minute earlier push with a few less zealots has more chance of doing damage imo then hitting a bit later. It is true that your version has the potency to keep on attacking with warpins but if you kill the third it's usually not an option to go for the natural anyways so that point is pretty moot, it's all about aggression towards the third and what it costs you to do so. Not relying on zealots through warpgate but making them the normal way has a few advantages: - you don't rely on a unscouted probe out the map or need to wait for a proxy pylon to finish, you simply walk (and fly) your units over. This is more reliable, faster and means you can just make a full wall for your FFE. I see your style is to leave a zealot hole gap but I find this much less economical and riskier then simply making a full wall and busting down a pylon later. - i don't need warpgate asap, makes it easier to get stargate faster which I tend to get up a fair bit faster. (i go +1 attack, stargate, warpgate) - I don't neccesarily need 3 gates that fast making it easier to probe harder in the meantime and transition effectively. - A proxy pylon has more risk of getting your zealots caught by roaches. I simply move them over and if I see roaches I retreat as roaches won't have speed at that time, while letting the voidray kill roaches or proceed with harass. With proxy pylon I've had a new batch of zealots being caught by roaches right away and killed. Either way both methods have their merits I guess. If you're initial probe got a good hiding spot and can make a proxy pylon unscathed it's a waste not to go for it but if it got killed (often happens to me when i need to confirm if he finished the natural), I find it simply easier to stream zealots then to hope i can sneak out another probe and make a proxy. Ofcourse it also depends on the way you make your wall when FFEing, with your style of leaving 1 gap it's easier to move out with a probe while I wall completely when easily possible (like on tal darim and shakuras for example). | ||
|
lSasquatchl
United States309 Posts
| ||
| ||
