EPTAlthough aggressive play is riskier and a theoretically perfect defensive player should always win via superior scouting and adaptation, in practice no one is perfect and even pro players will make mistakes. Playing the conventional passive defensive style requires and develops good scouting ability, whereas more aggressive styles require and develop good multitasking. Playing defensively means recognizing what your opponent is doing, coming up with the correct counter response; however there are many builds/variations to learn and sometimes you just die when you misread a situation. Playing aggressively makes scouting somewhat redundant as you force him to show what units he's been building, and meanwhile you need to learn to switch quickly between controlling units, making more units, spreading creep and injecting hatcheries. In addition you might have to build stuff in reaction to what you see during the attack (e.g. prepare for banshees if you see starport with techlab) in addition to everything else. Learning to multitask well in such situations can be quite valuable in terms of skill development regardless of what style you prefer.
[G] Zerg Guide to Macro-Aggression - Page 2
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
zylog
Canada943 Posts
Although aggressive play is riskier and a theoretically perfect defensive player should always win via superior scouting and adaptation, in practice no one is perfect and even pro players will make mistakes. Playing the conventional passive defensive style requires and develops good scouting ability, whereas more aggressive styles require and develop good multitasking. Playing defensively means recognizing what your opponent is doing, coming up with the correct counter response; however there are many builds/variations to learn and sometimes you just die when you misread a situation. Playing aggressively makes scouting somewhat redundant as you force him to show what units he's been building, and meanwhile you need to learn to switch quickly between controlling units, making more units, spreading creep and injecting hatcheries. In addition you might have to build stuff in reaction to what you see during the attack (e.g. prepare for banshees if you see starport with techlab) in addition to everything else. Learning to multitask well in such situations can be quite valuable in terms of skill development regardless of what style you prefer. | ||
|
TangSC
Canada1866 Posts
On January 09 2012 10:50 zylog wrote: Hey, I really like how this guide is presented with both the pictures and attention to detail. Although aggressive play is riskier and a theoretically perfect defensive player should always win via superior scouting and adaptation, in practice no one is perfect and even pro players will make mistakes. Playing the conventional passive defensive style requires and develops good scouting ability, whereas more aggressive styles require and develop good multitasking. Playing defensively means recognizing what your opponent is doing, coming up with the correct counter response; however there are many builds/variations to learn and sometimes you just die when you misread a situation. Playing aggressively makes scouting somewhat redundant as you force him to show what units he's been building, and meanwhile you need to learn to switch quickly between controlling units, making more units, spreading creep and injecting hatcheries. In addition you might have to build stuff in reaction to what you see during the attack (e.g. prepare for banshees if you see starport with techlab) in addition to everything else. Learning to multitask well in such situations can be quite valuable in terms of skill development regardless of what style you prefer. Thanks zylog, I think you're right about multitasking and aggression. While macro can be a very active style if you're spreading creep, rallying overlords, producing drones/workers, spitting, AND scouting, there is generally more multitasking to do when you're putting pressure on. So I think it is fair to say this type of style will improve multitasking faster than macro, but macro will improve your ability to scout/responding. | ||
|
DarKcS
Australia1237 Posts
| ||
|
Ascendance
United States57 Posts
| ||
|
chayde
United States13 Posts
| ||
|
mahO
France274 Posts
I think it is clear that terrans are used to be safe in many circomstances in TvZ nowadays, except for some 6/8 roach early pressure vs helion opening, which can be resolved quite easily if scouted with one marauder in bunker instead of switching add ons right away. But this timing seems quite unusual, plus it got a follow up, 7 min is the right time, one minute later it could be a huge fail I think, and before that it would be completely all in. I'll try to work on this one and master it, can be really usefull in a BO3! And by the way, thanks for the time you devoted into the image editing etc. Good guide P.S: pardon my english, but i'm french :p | ||
|
Tobberoth
Sweden6375 Posts
On January 09 2012 13:47 chayde wrote: Another fantastic write up Tang thank you for this. I think a lot of people have misconceptions that aggressive players can't macro behind their aggression and there's no thought behind aggressive builds. Posts like these really help show just because you're being aggressive that macro is still super important and gives lower players like myself specific mini concepts we can focus on while still trying to improve with our aggressive style. I also have to disagree with Ascendance. I really enjoyed how the guide was broken up with ideas for each "level". I'd love to see a write up similar to this from a ZvP standpoint. There is. Well, I don't know about a write up, but here's TangSCs lesson on how to do macro-aggression versus a toss FFE: http://tangstarcraft.com/?p=590 | ||
|
EndOfLineTv
United States741 Posts
On January 09 2012 08:40 Flonomenalz wrote: Tang, I'm going to try this right now. However, I will say that this is never going to be executed anywhere near perfectly due to microing army, scouting, sharking, dealing with drops, etc. How do you deal with drops with this style? You're skipping muta, so 2 medivac drops are really dangerous... when I play Ling Festor, I usually leave a festor and around 10 or so lings and 2 banes at my main, 3rd, then every base after that is mass spines. How do you deal with drops? As someone who uses a similar style as tang, I can tell you your best defense to drops (which will be the most dangerous thing vs you in the mid game) is good overlord spread. It is VERY important to send your OL's around your mains perimeter and your "thirds" asap. Additionally, send OL early to the corners of the map, so you can watch for any sneaky drops too. Knowelege is power, and having 16 lings having a party under drop ships will prevent most of the drops for actually occuring. | ||
|
nface
106 Posts
| ||
|
grs
Germany2339 Posts
| ||
|
Tobberoth
Sweden6375 Posts
On January 09 2012 20:18 nface wrote: You played something like this against me on Ladder and I can just say it's a terrible strategy. It is pretty much an All in too, you may have several hatcheries but your worker count is low and thus your satturation on the other bases is bad. You failed your first All in attack against me and did two more all in attacks which got weaker continuesly. Against a regular Reactor Hellion Expand build this is not viable. As a matter of fact I don't see this being viable at all except against a 1 rax gasless expand maybe or an early double expand build. So basically you're calling an All in 'Macro Aggression', I don't see how you can possibly enter a macro game with this build when not doing huge damage. You shouldn't teach people all ins, rather help them play solid macro games. How is it more all-in than any big terran push? Doing a timing push will always cost the aggressor, and doing a push in itself does mean you have to do damage to gain or lose an advantage. I especially don't get why it wouldn't work against a hellion expand, roaches rofl at hellions and 8 roaches + 30 lings is way more than a bunker can hold. The terran will be forced to scout it and react, which is damage in itself, and the push will probably still do some damage. Since the Zerg still gets his third by 7 minutes, gets map control and forces the terran to build defenses, I really don't see how this differs all that much from any terran or toss timing push. I especially have some issues with your claims that zergs should learn to play macro games instead. How? After a hellion expand, from terran, it's extremely hard to get a third since hellions take map control and a terran can easily go all-in with hellions or get dropships and put hellions in your main. The most common strategies are indeed early roaches or 2base muta, neither being much more economical than this one. | ||
|
nface
106 Posts
| ||
|
EndOfLineTv
United States741 Posts
Or inbase expand with 1-2 bunkers with scvs ready to repair. | ||
|
They_
Japan62 Posts
Really solid build all around. I also think that banshees won't be out in time for this build as well. Even so, it would leave the terran with even less ground units. All in all, not only the metagame is dealt with, but also it lets you transition into a solid mid-late game play safely. | ||
|
TangSC
Canada1866 Posts
On January 09 2012 23:11 They_ wrote: This is a really good guide that can counter the current ZvT metagame (reactor hellions). It is really aggressive and macro-oriented at the same time by taking the third before the 8 min mark. This can be even deadlier if used by the right person. I have a question though, when do you scout for this build? Usual 13 (short) 11 (long) just to check gases? Actually on most close-air spawns (Metal, shattered, shakuras, antiga) you can perch your overlord in vision of both the terran gas. I generally don't scout until after the expansion (usually 14 or 15 supply) because my build doesn't really deviate until after the pool finishes, regardless of what I see. If I determine it's a 2rax or bunker rush, I start the queen at my expansion only, pull a bunch of drones, and start 1-2 spines with zerglings right away. I keep making lings until I feel like I'm definitely going to get the spines finished, then switch back into drones with the same roach/ling transition planned - it'll just be delayed by however many drones I used to make spines/zerglings. | ||
|
nOondn
564 Posts
| ||
|
mrGRAPE
Singapore293 Posts
I've used this a couple of times and I realised that this works pretty well against reactor hellion expand at Platinum level provided that I manage to get the hellions before running my zerglings in. A small misstep by sending in the zerglings too early can easily wipe them all out if the opponent has >4 hellions and some marines with a bunker as well. If all goes well, the Terran should lift off the command center and retreat back up his wall. At this point I think it's pretty much whether or not I have enough roaches to bust up the wall or retreat. There were a couple of games where I misread the situation thinking that I should have enough when actually I don't have as much as I needed. I think it's important to drone up behind this attack or expand as the Terran can still turtle behind this especially if some roaches were lost in the initial push then it might not be as easy to bust up the ramp. Additionally, if the Terran had been mining gas then it's entirely possible that he was going mass hellion into a cloaked banshee all in. I find that also building an evo chamber whenever possible during larva down time while pushing can help improve chances of surviving if a banshee comes out. You never really stated a particular timing or supply for that so I do it once I hit my opponent's ramp because if he's going banshees behind that wall of hellions then it'll be very likely that his first banshee would have already been out by the time the push comes. | ||
|
Olsson
Sweden931 Posts
On January 09 2012 08:17 TTneko wrote: Great, lets raise a generation of Zerg to cheese and all-in T_T How is this cheese/all-in. Terran does marine/tank pushes, 2rax, drops, hellion pokes and banshee harass, is that all-in? No. | ||
|
WhiteLen
8 Posts
| ||
|
nface
106 Posts
On January 10 2012 00:32 WhiteLen wrote: Yes, this clearly isn't all in at all. Just because he used a small push to deter his opponents doesn't mean he is risking his game. In a reactor hellion expand the terran still spends some money on hellions to harrass. Here, Tang uses 8 roaches and some lings to pressure. And this would be about 15 potential drones not being built, if you fail with your pressure, you're behind. Let's call it semi-all in then. | ||
| ||
