|
Please have some semblance of an idea of what you're talking about. |
I have just been playing around with build orders and a unit tester to see the kind of army that protoss can have.
Starting with ffe:
By 12 minutes I could have around 30 blink stalkers, 5-6 sentries and 2-3immortals with +3 very nearly done. This is more than enough to defeat maxed roaches.
As an alternative by 12 minutes I managed around 35 charge-lots, 6 archons 2 immortals, and a few sentries with +3. Again this can defeat maxed roaches and with around 10 gates you can warp in waves of zealots and the archons and immortals never die. You then have some interesting options with warp prisms such as storm drops.
In either case you can also have a 3rd started by 12minutes.
I am not a masters player so would curious what others can manage. This of course is without doing anything else and I realise things are different in an actual game.
|
This may be ludicrous, but what about a pylon/cannon block/delay at the 3rd of the Zerg. You know they're going to get it, and you place an early cannon behind the minerals and they have to somehow remove that with slow lings OR expand somewhere else. Early amount of slings limits the drone count, and expanding somewhere else opens up the opportunity for precision attacks against what should be a stranded base.
In short, if you don't want them on three bases, want to scout if they're trying to go for it, and don't want to juke a probe around forever, maybe it's best to create a mild, 250 mineral deterrent. Your probe can also get back to the business of mining.
|
I'm not anywhere near kcdc's level, but at 900-1000 masters, I'm just going FFE into 1 gate robo into either 6 gate robo or 5 gate 2 robo 1/1/0 timing attacks and having fair success with it against the current metagame. I realize these are all-ins and the latter is just a current metagame strat. But I'm not good enough to keep my 3rd alive with 4 gate robo so I've given up on it myself.
|
On April 05 2012 03:58 Startyr wrote:
I have just been playing around with build orders and a unit tester to see the kind of army that protoss can have.
Starting with ffe:
By 12 minutes I could have around 30 blink stalkers, 5-6 sentries and 2-3immortals with +3 very nearly done. This is more than enough to defeat maxed roaches.
It's not that simple. You can't get a Zerg max out without pressuring him at 12', else you *may* indeed be able to survive his push, but you'll die in the longer game since he'll be far ahead economically, and probably on 5 bases already.
If you factor in some early pressure, some teching and a fast third ( meaning you can't go all-in and cut probes at 55, which I suspect you did to reach those numbers at this timing ) you definitely won't have such a powerful army at 12'.
So basically: if you go all-in, cut probes, cut tech and don't take a third, you'll get a strong army and survive the 12' roach timing but you'll die to his remax and insane eco.
If you don't go all-in, don't cut probes, continue to tech and take a third, your army will be much weaker but you'll be in a better position if you survive the 12' push.
|
High masters zerg - have been playing fast-max roach/hydra since season 1. Here is my two cents:
sentry/stalker/immortal can be insanely effective against pure roach while you buy time for colossus on 3 bases. You just need 6 or 7 sentries and really, really good forcefields. I'm not saying it's easy, but I think it's doable on many maps (antiga, shakuras, metal...)
also, I've always thought gateway-first is much better than FFE. I don't remember zergs ever performing well in the matchup when every protoss did 3 gate sentry expand into colossus deathball every game. Are roach/ling all-ins really that good? Then, protoss switched to FFE and zergs have been doing fine in ZvP ever since. I think many protoss like to go FFE just so they know they won't have to defend the roach/ling all-in. I'm aware that pros disagree - but personally I do much better against FFE than gateway first.
|
On April 05 2012 06:22 sciberbia wrote:
High masters zerg - have been playing fast-max roach/hydra since season 1. Here is my two cents:
sentry/stalker/immortal can be insanely effective against pure roach while you buy time for colossus on 3 bases. You just need 6 or 7 sentries and really, really good forcefields. I'm not saying it's easy, but I think it's doable on many maps (antiga, shakuras, metal...)
also, I've always thought gateway-first is much better than FFE. I don't remember zergs ever performing well in the matchup when every protoss did 3 gate sentry expand into colossus deathball every game. Are roach/ling all-ins really that good? Then, protoss switched to FFE and zergs have been doing fine in ZvP ever since. I think many protoss like to go FFE just so they know they won't have to defend the roach/ling all-in. I'm aware that pros disagree - but personally I do much better against FFE than gateway first.
What problems does 3 gate sentry present to you?
|
On April 05 2012 03:36 kcdc wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2012 23:08 Treehead wrote:On April 04 2012 06:01 kcdc wrote:
I'm coming around to the conclusion that all-in roulette is a stronger way to play the MU.
Z is straight up stronger in midgame, and with so few (any?) builds that can consistently hold a third against roach spam, it's inevitable that Z will come up with some curveballs that wreck the limited options that roach spam leaves open.
In related news, I think it's time for me to pick up some new games. All-in roulette in PvZ and PvP makes for a boring SC2. What exactly is it that is leaving you feeling as though the ridiculously fast third isn't viable? Edit: We've seen a number of replays of the fast third working against a zerg who gets a fast third. Are there replays as well where it just gets crushed by something we weren't really considering? Show nested quote +On April 04 2012 23:08 Treehead wrote:On April 04 2012 06:01 kcdc wrote:
I'm coming around to the conclusion that all-in roulette is a stronger way to play the MU.
Z is straight up stronger in midgame, and with so few (any?) builds that can consistently hold a third against roach spam, it's inevitable that Z will come up with some curveballs that wreck the limited options that roach spam leaves open.
In related news, I think it's time for me to pick up some new games. All-in roulette in PvZ and PvP makes for a boring SC2. What exactly is it that is leaving you feeling as though the ridiculously fast third isn't viable? Edit: We've seen a number of replays of the fast third working against a zerg who gets a fast third. Are there replays as well where it just gets crushed by something we weren't really considering? I think going fast third is viable, but I'm not convinced that it's especially strong. Having tested the fast third blink build a fair amount now, it's still really hard to defend the roach timing even tho the build is an attempt to optimize defense of that roach timing. And it's not like holding the third puts you in a commanding position. If Z attacks with 60 drones and you defend cleanly, you're slightly ahead. If you take some damage or Z drones to 70 before attacking, you're even. If Z doesn't bother trying to bust your third and instead goes quick hive, I'm not even sure you're even. It seems like if you want to win as often as possible, you should focus on perfecting a variety of 2-base all-ins that will keep Z guessing and mix in a fast third build to keep his defense honest. I'm not saying there aren't strong PvZ builds. It just seems like PvZ is turning into PvP where you pick a build, execute it as well as you can, and hope. I personally don't find that type of play very fun. I'll be interested to see if HotS brings some new, fun options.
I imagine that Oracle builds may be a cool place to focus. They're fast, and can provide an economic harassment that could prove more effective than phoenix. Now, if you need a fleet beacon, god help us all.
|
kcdc- i hope that you get over this little rut you are in 
i don't think pvp is as bad as you depict it. phoenix openers and generic blink-robo builds might be weak against some openers and strong against others, but there is CERTAINLY a TREMENDOUS amount of wiggle room for a build that is weaker incidentally to still secure a win, all else equal. the only caveat is scouting ability which is a big issue-- i remember we played a game a while back where your timing crushed me because you canceled your nexus and i didn't bother to confirm its completion, though i easily could have scouted this and prepared better
that being said, i would love it if observer speed did not require the support bay, because observer scouts are handled pretty well by players actively trying to deny scout information.
edit: of course, there are certainly times where builds just die to other builds. for instance phoenix opener vs speed wp immortal drops.. even white-ra could not overcome this disadvantage xD
|
On April 05 2012 06:25 whoopadeedoo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2012 06:22 sciberbia wrote:
High masters zerg - have been playing fast-max roach/hydra since season 1. Here is my two cents:
sentry/stalker/immortal can be insanely effective against pure roach while you buy time for colossus on 3 bases. You just need 6 or 7 sentries and really, really good forcefields. I'm not saying it's easy, but I think it's doable on many maps (antiga, shakuras, metal...)
also, I've always thought gateway-first is much better than FFE. I don't remember zergs ever performing well in the matchup when every protoss did 3 gate sentry expand into colossus deathball every game. Are roach/ling all-ins really that good? Then, protoss switched to FFE and zergs have been doing fine in ZvP ever since. I think many protoss like to go FFE just so they know they won't have to defend the roach/ling all-in. I'm aware that pros disagree - but personally I do much better against FFE than gateway first. What problems does 3 gate sentry present to you?
Basically it's that it keeps me guessing. Given complete information, zerg is obviously the strongest race, because it's reactive. Protoss and Terran benefit greatly by hiding their build from zerg.
One huge advantage of 3 gate sentry is that you can deny overlord scouts. Against FFE, I'm guaranteed to see literally everything for the price of a single overlord at 7:00. Against 3 gate sentry, I can't reliably see your base until lair is done.
3 gate sentry also forces early ling speed for scouting the front of your base and for defense. This hurts my economy.
An initial zealot/stalker or stalker/stalker push force lings and also hurt my economy.
After you have a reasonable number of sentries, you can start pushing out to the watch tower and force me to figure out exactly how many units I need to make. You can contest map control throughout the early game. Sometimes I die to pushes off 3/4 gates because I am too greedy. Sometimes I overmake defense and lose in late game to colossus deathball.
I'm aware there are also advantages to FFE (namely protoss economy and safety) and I can't be certain that 3 gate sentry FE is definitively better, but it at least forces me to make guesses as opposed to execute a 12 minute build order every game with complete information.
|
On April 05 2012 07:00 Alejandrisha wrote:kcdc- i hope that you get over this little rut you are in i don't think pvp is as bad as you depict it. phoenix openers and generic blink-robo builds might be weak against some openers and strong against others, but there is CERTAINLY a TREMENDOUS amount of wiggle room for a build that is weaker incidentally to still secure a win, all else equal. the only caveat is scouting ability which is a big issue-- i remember we played a game a while back where your timing crushed me because you canceled your nexus and i didn't bother to confirm its completion, though i easily could have scouted this and prepared better that being said, i would love it if observer speed did not require the support bay, because observer scouts are handled pretty well by players actively trying to deny scout information. edit: of course, there are certainly times where builds just die to other builds. for instance phoenix opener vs speed wp immortal drops.. even white-ra could not overcome this disadvantage xD
Getting pretty off-topic here, but there are a lot of hard counters in PvP. I'd go as far as saying that every PvP opening has a chance of turning into a build order loss. Phoenix openings are solidly countered by FE. Blink obs is nearly auto-loss against FE unless the defender screws up and lets you forcefield their army inside their main, allowing a free nexus snipe. Granted, that happens often enough, so I'll call FE a moderate counter vs blink robo instead of a hard counter.
And after phoenix-robo and blink-robo, the rock-paper-scissors nature becomes much more apparent. You went blink? Haha, I went DT's. You went FE? Haha, I opened 3 gate pressure. You opened immortal drop? Enoy these phoenixes!
RTS is my favorite genre of game, but PvP doesn't do it for me. It's SC2's version of BW ZvZ. The HotS nexus-energy-for-turret ability (better remembered as the assimilator rush ability) seems like an attempt to fix PvP by implementing a defender's advantage. Maybe they'll come up with something that will make it more fun.
|
United States8477 Posts
On April 05 2012 07:50 kcdc wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2012 07:00 Alejandrisha wrote:kcdc- i hope that you get over this little rut you are in i don't think pvp is as bad as you depict it. phoenix openers and generic blink-robo builds might be weak against some openers and strong against others, but there is CERTAINLY a TREMENDOUS amount of wiggle room for a build that is weaker incidentally to still secure a win, all else equal. the only caveat is scouting ability which is a big issue-- i remember we played a game a while back where your timing crushed me because you canceled your nexus and i didn't bother to confirm its completion, though i easily could have scouted this and prepared better that being said, i would love it if observer speed did not require the support bay, because observer scouts are handled pretty well by players actively trying to deny scout information. edit: of course, there are certainly times where builds just die to other builds. for instance phoenix opener vs speed wp immortal drops.. even white-ra could not overcome this disadvantage xD Getting pretty off-topic here, but there are a lot of hard counters in PvP. I'd go as far as saying that every PvP opening has a chance of turning into a build order loss. Phoenix openings are solidly countered by FE. Blink obs is nearly auto-loss against FE unless the defender screws up and lets you forcefield their army inside their main, allowing a free nexus snipe. Granted, that happens often enough, so I'll call FE a moderate counter vs blink robo instead of a hard counter. And after phoenix-robo and blink-robo, the rock-paper-scissors nature becomes much more apparent. You went blink? Haha, I went DT's. You went FE? Haha, I opened 3 gate pressure. You opened immortal drop? Enoy these phoenixes! RTS is my favorite genre of game, but PvP doesn't do it for me. It's SC2's version of BW ZvZ. The HotS nexus-energy-for-turret ability (better remembered as the assimilator rush ability) seems like an attempt to fix PvP by implementing a defender's advantage. Maybe they'll come up with something that will make it more fun.
2 gate FE and 3 gate robo are both also fairly stable openings. So you have 4 stable openings! You also shouldn't blind immortal drop; it's only meant as a reaction when both players go robo without twilight.
|
Stop talking about PvP. This threat is about PvZ and even blue posters should stick to the topic.
|
On April 05 2012 07:50 kcdc wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2012 07:00 Alejandrisha wrote:kcdc- i hope that you get over this little rut you are in i don't think pvp is as bad as you depict it. phoenix openers and generic blink-robo builds might be weak against some openers and strong against others, but there is CERTAINLY a TREMENDOUS amount of wiggle room for a build that is weaker incidentally to still secure a win, all else equal. the only caveat is scouting ability which is a big issue-- i remember we played a game a while back where your timing crushed me because you canceled your nexus and i didn't bother to confirm its completion, though i easily could have scouted this and prepared better that being said, i would love it if observer speed did not require the support bay, because observer scouts are handled pretty well by players actively trying to deny scout information. edit: of course, there are certainly times where builds just die to other builds. for instance phoenix opener vs speed wp immortal drops.. even white-ra could not overcome this disadvantage xD Getting pretty off-topic here, but there are a lot of hard counters in PvP. I'd go as far as saying that every PvP opening has a chance of turning into a build order loss. Phoenix openings are solidly countered by FE. Blink obs is nearly auto-loss against FE unless the defender screws up and lets you forcefield their army inside their main, allowing a free nexus snipe. Granted, that happens often enough, so I'll call FE a moderate counter vs blink robo instead of a hard counter. And after phoenix-robo and blink-robo, the rock-paper-scissors nature becomes much more apparent. You went blink? Haha, I went DT's. You went FE? Haha, I opened 3 gate pressure. You opened immortal drop? Enoy these phoenixes! RTS is my favorite genre of game, but PvP doesn't do it for me. It's SC2's version of BW ZvZ. The HotS nexus-energy-for-turret ability (better remembered as the assimilator rush ability) seems like an attempt to fix PvP by implementing a defender's advantage. Maybe they'll come up with something that will make it more fun.
kcdc, you're being a bit fatalistic. Imo ZvZ remains the worst mirror matchup since I think its entire dynamic is driven by the fact that zerg can't wall in. This is like 4 gate wars before the ramp vision nerf, but worse. The only redeeming quality of ZvZ is the possibility of gentleman's agreements, the fact that both parties pretty much can always see each other's openings and respond accordingly, so hatch first is not an auto loss in ZvZ.
On ladder, you have to select a handful of builds that you think will consistently get you decent results. This handful is picked from professional gamers and shifts according to the meta game they set up. The cyclicity you mention is true, but there is some stability in the current batch of strategies doing the rounds. Occasionally, someone will throw you an oddball, but taking that as an aberration, since such strategies are usually blindly done and will lose to another strategy in your bundle, you can give yourself a fighting chance in the PvP roulette. Gambling is still a game!
|
On April 05 2012 08:09 mumpfel wrote:
Stop talking about PvP. This threat is about PvZ and even blue posters should stick to the topic.
Me thinks mumpfel is new here or trying to get banned. The rest of us don't mind two high level players going off in a minor side-discussion about strats ... in his own thread.
|
On April 05 2012 08:13 whoopadeedoo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2012 08:09 mumpfel wrote:
Stop talking about PvP. This threat is about PvZ and even blue posters should stick to the topic. Me thinks mumpfel is new here or trying to get banned. The rest of us don't mind two high level players going off in a minor side-discussion about strats ... in his own thread.
Stop kissing ass, the man is right, and kcdc put the off topic disclaimer.
|
This is the last I'll say about this, but let the mods decide. If you've been here long enough, these short (and constructive) side discussions in a 51+ page thread are perfectly normal, so I don't know why mumpfel is getting his panties in a bunch. And, um, didn't you just contribute to the OT discussion too? What is this ...
|
|
|
Because I don't care that he went on a tangent. If someone else points out that they are on a tangent, and they object to that, power to them man, especially since your post contributed exactly nothing to this thread or kcdc's tangent.
|
Show nested quote +On April 05 2012 08:11 chestnutcc wrote:
Show nested quote +
kcdc, you're being a bit fatalistic. Imo ZvZ remains the worst mirror matchup since I think its entire dynamic is driven by the fact that zerg can't wall in. This is like 4 gate wars before the ramp vision nerf, but worse. The only redeeming quality of ZvZ is the possibility of gentleman's agreements, the fact that both parties pretty much can always see each other's openings and respond accordingly, so hatch first is not an auto loss in ZvZ.
On ladder, you have to select a handful of builds that you think will consistently get you decent results. This handful is picked from professional gamers and shifts according to the meta game they set up. The cyclicity you mention is true, but there is some stability in the current batch of strategies doing the rounds. Occasionally, someone will throw you an oddball, but taking that as an aberration, since such strategies are usually blindly done and will lose to another strategy in your bundle, you can give yourself a fighting chance in the PvP roulette. Gambling is still a game! Gambling isn't as fun as working out what your opponent is doing and crushing their face, which is possible in PvT, less-possible in PvZ and more-or-less impossible in PvP. Anyway...
That is subjective, you must admit. One of the reasons koreans dominate as they do is their willingness to gamble.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
