EPT[D] PvZ Beating Stephano Style Roaches - Page 10
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
Please have some semblance of an idea of what you're talking about. | ||
|
Sakray
France2198 Posts
| ||
|
K3Nyy
United States1961 Posts
On March 16 2012 05:08 Drowsy wrote: lolno. The immortal allin is wayyy stronger than blink allin for 2 big reasons: burrow and spinecrawlers. The push he did is a very common one and the colossus thing is usually not part of it. You should be hitting with it around 11:00, well before mutas. I'm not talking about blink allin. I'm talking about having blink stalkers as the core of your army as opposed to making colo. It's what every Korean Protoss does nowadays. | ||
|
Treehead
999 Posts
On March 16 2012 05:57 Sakray wrote: There's something I noticed while reading the thread which actually kinda frightened me, it's that now, Protoss seems to give up trying to reach late-game and almost do ONLY 2 bases all-in. In my opinion, it's an indication that something is clearly wrong. The Stephano Style reminds me the 1/1/1 era, an easy-to-pull build, freaking effective, and VERY hard to pull-off. Some koreans managed to succeed at holding it, and they were at the top (MC vs Puma for exemple), which means, insane micro, insane macro, etc...From the replays that you've shown, you need to throw down absolutely perfect forcefields if you want to survive (and even with that, it's almost sure you'll die anyway). But actually, the build is getting very popular even at low leagues, where 99% of protoss land perfect forcefields by a one-time-luck shot. You need to have insane micro to defend against a build that is easy to execute, and doesn't require too many micro (I think that at low/mid platevery zrg have enough micro to do so), so by the time someone (and by someone I mean pro player) find a way that isn't too hard to pull, low leagues players will get absolutely trashed in almost every PvZ they'll play. For the 1/1/1, people started to stop abusing it after the 2s rax nerf, so in my opinion, PvZ winrate will decrease alot for the next months, nerf or not. Another thing that I don't like is that nowadays, like some people pointed it here, PvZ is about 2 bases all-in, or 2 (sometimes 3) bases turtle into huge deathball. These seems to be the only options, since FFE is starting, like in BW, to be the only viable build. Moreover, 2 bases all-in is getting crushed by this mass roach build, which give us the option to just turtle (and some people stated that it's a bad idea because you expose yourself to a huge techswitch which will kill you). And with Stephano Style, I think that even with FFE, Protoss have to play the whole game behind, which is REALLY weird, and imo, imbalanced. That's actually not necessarily problematic. It could just be indicative of pros looking for a style that hasn't been refined yet. It happened in PvZ a long time ago, but the other way around. When there's a build or two that people don't know how to react to, it puts a lot of pressure on the matchup. I think (hope?) Blizzard has had some ideas in their back pocket for a while about how to fix things - not that we "need" it, but it was they who said that zerg would have an advantage if they allowed larger maps on the ladder. (We told them they were wrong, and thus far, it hasn't really been shown to be true anyway. | ||
|
Crying
Bulgaria778 Posts
He once played with mouzMaNa on his stream and said that the matchup is retarded because you need to make 2 units to win the game. Correct me if im wrong tho. | ||
|
Belha
Italy2850 Posts
| ||
|
Fenneth
Australia354 Posts
| ||
|
Crying
Bulgaria778 Posts
So no. | ||
|
drbrown
Sweden442 Posts
On March 16 2012 06:05 Crying wrote: I think even Stephano stated that ZvP is imba. He once played with mouzMaNa on his stream and said that the matchup is retarded because you need to make 2 units to win the game. Correct me if im wrong tho. Stephano very rarely plays good PvZ players though, consider the fact that his ZvP is Code S level at least, and the protosses he faces are either random foreigners or code B players it's not that surprising that he deemes the match-up too easy. | ||
|
Crying
Bulgaria778 Posts
User was warned for this post | ||
|
kcdc
United States2311 Posts
On March 16 2012 05:39 SaroVati wrote: I'm confused as to discussing your PLAY in the game is "outside the scope of this thread". You gave us a replay to base off of, while consistently pointing out that the zerg is 80 supply ahead of you, but not criticize how you played it out? I'm not trying to start beef with you or something, but you can't just downplay the fact that your quality of play didn't affect the outcome of that game. It's the same reason why lots of micro-intensive all-ins are IMPOSSIBLE for lower level players. A strategy might work to counter another with really good control, but the lack of control doesn't just make that build suck. As to your comments, you are constantly telling us to provide a replay with a zerg at X supply, doing the Stephano build, and losing in an open-field engagement. An open field engagement? That's like saying a colossus sucks vs. marines because when completely surrounded and spread out, the marines shit on a colossus. When you engage early game, a zealot in a choke is worth it's weight in GOLD vs. zerglings. If you get surrounded, your zealot loses cost for cost vs. zerglings, which it in theory counters. Notice the flaw in your arguement? I'm a fellow protoss, hovering top 50 GM with lots of bonus pool, and play some of the tip top zergs all the time. I don't want to justify why this build is OP or not, I'd actually rather love if there WAS a counter to it. That being said, I won't blindly say that the build is impossible to hold when you put yourself in a very unfavourable position. Still though, I think a few people have eluded to the fact that the main problem is the lack of pressure you put on your opponent. Aside from the fact I feel the zerg player utilized his macro mechanics better than you, I think you should've pressured somehow. I know this thread is about dealing with the specific strategy and not necessarily your specific build, but if that's the case please stop referencing the numbers OF the replay to emphasize your point then? My play in that game is outside the scope of the thread because the thread isn't about 2-base immortal all-in. I know I didn't do a good 2-base immortal all-in in that game, and ChaosKeeper properly crushed my poor play. This discussion is focused on how P can go about beating the Stephano-style play, and I posted that replay simplay as a reference for anyone who doesn't know what the Stephano-style roach build looks like. I can't tell for sure, but it sounds like you think immortal-sentry is a good answer. If so, post some replays and let us have a look. And the reason I say open field engagement is that the defender picks where the fight happens. In the case of a Protoss 2-base timing, the Zerg can always force the engagement in an open field assuming he didn't overdrone. If the Zerg is defending a 2-base timing and lets the engagement happen in a choke, the Zerg made a critical error, and the replay won't be a good example of the interaction between the builds. Of course, if P takes a third, he's the defender, and the fight should happen in a choke unless P screws up. So feel free to post replays where P takes a third and holds in chokes. As for pressure, I have lots of builds that pressure. The immortal/sentry build isn't very good for pressuring, but you'll note that I faked pressure in that game by advancing with zealots and dropping a pylon to fake a 4g +1 zealot timing. A warp prism would have been a little better. But at the end of the day, the Stephano build deflects pressure very well, and while I play and watch a ton of games, I'm not aware of any pressure that P can do to reliably keep himself within 50 supply. If you know, please share. | ||
|
Treehead
999 Posts
On March 15 2012 20:32 Plexa wrote: My personal opinion is that PvZ will head this way: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=271279 to punish anyone excessively greedy (that is a mothership/6 gate push to kill super fast thirds) or expand safely behind cloak and vortex. I don't think there is any way for protoss to (safely) match the Zergs econ so having some kind of tech advantage/significant upgrade advantage is a must (but the upgrade advantage is being nullified by quick +1 and sometimes +1/+1). Immortals just aren't good enough vs a ton of roaches (and set you up to get crushed by mutas), Colossus work but take ages to get to the point where they can make a meaningful difference, Gateway units are just too weak once Roaches get speed and air heavy doesn't allow you to expand (and spore are insanely good). Motherships provide an instant army boost on your existing army while giving you cover to expand or the power to tackle a greedy player. Protoss is balanced really stupidly, to be blunt. Aside from timing pushes (most of which are now useless) Protoss is always weak in the early game. Mostly because if their units were strong warp tech becomes too good. So to compensate, P lategame is super strong and almost unbeatable given equal econ. As a result P is statistically balanced, but imbalanced at the start and end. No one has really focused on this yet, but I think this is a great approach to look at. Many people open stargate already to discourage mutas (and beacon is one more step in that direction), and you can't move through middle of the map with detection with pure roaches unless protoss isn't scouting. I don't necessarily agree with using it in a 2-base allin, since most pressure builds (esp. tech-heavy ones) have historically been figured out after a time. But, what if you got a mothership early? Roaches certainly can't defend any overseers they get out, can they? Now, the question is, do you have time to deal with hydras? Storm seems like it'd come too late, wouldn't it? Do we just need to mess around super early third and cannoning? How fast can you get a mothership if you rush to it after FFE? Has anyone looked? | ||
|
Fenneth
Australia354 Posts
On March 16 2012 06:26 Crying wrote: Im quite possitive that without gimmicky play u cant beat Stephano. I'll post this replay again http://drop.sc/134585 and this replay pack from Stephano a couple of months ago http://www.mediafire.com/?t72cziiga22oyo2 in which he loses 5 straight games to Squirtle, who uses a variety of non-gimmicky strats. | ||
|
nanoscorp
United States1237 Posts
Back in early days, MC played his Nexus-cancel 4-gate to mess with the zerg and come up with a stronger army that scouting would initially indicate. Could P do something similar with a 3rd base, feinting economic play while cutting probes and building up a roach/ling-killing army? There's a pretty wide window between the low and high tech armies of Z so with a favorable exchange at the bait-3rd and steady tech behind it, P could come in with overwhelming force before the Z is ready. | ||
|
freetgy
1720 Posts
On March 16 2012 05:57 Sakray wrote: There's something I noticed while reading the thread which actually kinda frightened me, it's that now, Protoss seems to give up trying to reach late-game and almost do ONLY 2 bases all-in. In my opinion, it's an indication that something is clearly wrong. This was bound to happen, when toss got nerved. Roaches today are enough to stop any early / mid game timing push, while they can also deny any kind of fast 3rd of toss except on very few maps. This leaves protoss with nothing else than gimmicky strategies. Zerg currently has the clear advantage because both openings protoss can do (1 base or FFE) can be countered just by fast hatch strategies and pure reactionary play. People say protoss all-in so much, but there is nothing else left for protoss to do, to catch the zerg on the wrong moment. The reason is simple, if you don't commit to an all-in zerg goes super greedy mode and you will just get outtraded and denied a third forever. People seem to forget 2 hatches are equal of 8 gates of production while 3 has is comparable to 10-12 gates I have only found 2 strategies that work against those strategies after FFE, 1) super fast dts 2) sentry heavy immortal / storm all-in on 2 bases. And even this strategies could be countered, if zerg players knew to micro their units. | ||
|
testthewest
Germany274 Posts
Then 2-3 Voids that are with your army can be a deadly asset. Of course, if you fail you are dead meat^^ | ||
|
Crying
Bulgaria778 Posts
| ||
|
Skyro
United States1823 Posts
On March 16 2012 06:19 Fenneth wrote: Speaking as a somewhat notoriously whiny Protoss, I think you guys are being a bit whiny. In the recent MLG tournament, for example, PvZ was a 50/50 matchup, and more than half those Zerg wins are courtesy of the best player in the world. There are a ton of options to be explored further before we start crying imba. Does every thread have to devolve into balance talk? The vast majority of the people posting in this thread is not crying OP. There is a difference between "is it possible to get a 3rd out of a FFE" and "zerg is op." Everybody knows 2-base timings are strong and is currently the crux of this matchup. | ||
|
GoldenH
1115 Posts
I feel like I have to delay his first, however, even 1 base allins are no good as the zerg still has time to get his third up before I can hit him! I can force a Zerg to build a few more lings and an extra queen, but that just means that my push has to come later, as I need to build up more units before I can push out, and the zerg has better creep spread to my base so he can counter attack as soon as I do. I am honestly at a loss as to what can be done besides hope to win a base race against an opponent who has at least one extra base than me. | ||
|
Fenneth
Australia354 Posts
On March 16 2012 06:48 Skyro wrote: Does every thread have to devolve into balance talk? The vast majority of the people posting in this thread is not crying OP. There is a difference between "is it possible to get a 3rd out of a FFE" and "zerg is op." Everybody knows 2-base timings are strong and is currently the crux of this matchup. Not everyone is saying "zerg is op".. but quite a lot of people are. My post was directed at those people. | ||
|
ThePianoDentist
United Kingdom698 Posts
obviously you have to have an eye on whether they do go hydras. Either 1 pheonix to scout their bases occasionally or i prefer hallucination (no point just getting 1 pheonix rather than 5, and I like hallucinating colossi for my later push as this is very underused and most zergs i meet won't have an overseer with their army unless they think you've got a mothership or dts) I don't blindly pump out 3 voids, I make 1 for my +1 zealot void pressure. Then I make more if I feel like he is committing himself to heavy roach. And I know their seems to be quite a bit of redundancy in my build. I get an early stargate and often hardly ever use it, but I play with the aim to get to late game so know I am going to be throwing that fleet beacon down later anyway also obviously this will not work on maps such as metalopolis as you will just get mondragoned into oblivion with such wide open thirds and natural. other notes I put my robo down basically as my third goes down and I go double robo if I don't think he's going mutas. if he doesn't go hydras and goes for this roach ling aggression I go for a mix of immortals and colossi making colossi when range is close to finishing this is obviously playing sub-stephano zergs but this is how I would try and deal with it | ||
| ||
