EPTme neither. It's your decision to try it out. I just mentioned it again since u still seem so helpless against zerg metagame.
[D] PvZ Beating Stephano Style Roaches - Page 54
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
Please have some semblance of an idea of what you're talking about. | ||
|
Yuffie
132 Posts
me neither. It's your decision to try it out. I just mentioned it again since u still seem so helpless against zerg metagame. | ||
|
kcdc
United States2311 Posts
On April 07 2012 01:02 Yuffie wrote: kcdc, would you release guides of your builds when they ain't tested against all sorts of early pressure or blind counters ? me neither. It's your decision to try it out. I just mentioned it again since u still seem so helpless against zerg metagame. Do you have a replay where Z does what I suggested? I looked and didn't find one, but maybe I missed it. I'm hoping to be proven wrong and that zergling pressure off of gasless opening can't force a nexus cancel. I believe that your guide acknowledges that zergling pressure off of a 10 pool can foce a nexus cancel. Can the same pressure off of a 12 pool force the cancel? 14 pool? How late do the first 6 lings have to hit in order for you to be safe? | ||
|
aintthatfunny
193 Posts
On April 07 2012 00:12 kcdc wrote: That build seems good, but I still think 6 slow lings off of a 14 pool followed by 8 more lings could deny the nexus every time. On medium sized maps, the first 6 lings will hit your base when you have 1 zealot, a second zealot ~50% complete, a forge ~20% complete and a probe about to start a pylon on the low ground. The 6 lings will obviously deny the pylon, so you'll never be able to start a cannon. Then the lings just focus the nexus to force the cancel. You need 3 zealots and some probes to contest 14 lings, and even if you get to 3 zealots before the nexus dies, the lings can run in circles to finish it off. I guess if you pull a lot of probes, you can try to trap the lings. I don't know--I'd like to see a replay where Z tries this. It seems like an obvious counter, but I haven't seen an example. And while 14 lings is an investment (5 less drones than the standard 4 lings), Z hasn't taken gas and will be way ahead in macro if they force the nexus cancel. I've played my own version of that for several months at high master (yuffe definitely wasn't the first  ). And you can stop stuff like that rather easily if you pay attention to what your opponent is doing and micro well. Pulling probes of mining doesn't hurt at all if they cut drones to get extra lings out, and obviously if you micro well you shouldn't lose anything. I've very recently stopped doing it though because of 2 problems: 1. There are zergs who stay on 2 base and play macro: If every zerg who stayed on 2 base would go for a 2 base allin, there obviously wouldn't be a problem, but there exists a significant portion of zergs who insist on taking a 3rd way later than what you'd expect, and go for mutas/infestors, sometimes even burrow roaches. If the zerg fucks up, sure you can scout that there's no early roach warren or baneling nest (remember though at the same time he has to get roach warren earlier than normal since your warpgate is so fast!), but if he doesn't you have to guess and if you guess wrong you're dead. :/ 2. Even if a Z gets 3 bases, he can still mass lings and try and overrun you. I'm not sure whether it might be possible to perfect the build order so you don't lose to this. Maybe yuffe has, I prefer double scouting at 9/12 on 4 player maps to block hatcheries, and that's already where are BOs start to differ. But I've become fed up with losing to bad players all the time because of another allin I didn't prepare for, so I've reverted to 1 gate fe. Enjoying hallucinations atm.  | ||
|
Micket
United Kingdom2163 Posts
Passive thirds are shit lol. | ||
monk
United States8477 Posts
On April 07 2012 03:57 Micket wrote: Nestea just did a 11:30 maxout with +1 attack, roach speed, burrow, 70 drones, 4th base building, tunneling claws nearly finished and spire completed. Passive thirds are shit lol. Tails could have defended with better sim city. | ||
Teoita
Italy12248 Posts
On April 07 2012 04:10 NrGmonk wrote: Tails could have defended with better sim city. How would you simcity a third like that? On some maps it's pretty straightforward (say, Entombed valley or Shattered Temple), but if the third is a bit more open and maybe even on the low ground (metropolis, cloud kingdom, etc) it seems pretty hard. | ||
|
SiroKO
France721 Posts
On April 07 2012 04:10 NrGmonk wrote: Tails could have defended with better sim city. Not really. This discussion reminds me of 4 gate during beta, back when the warpgate research time made it the only strat to go. My point is that they will always be players claiming that they exist counters... That you need to put more pressure, take a 3rd sooner etc... but in the end, nothing will really counter it, unless the Zerg messes up. Besides, the skill required to pull it off is by no means comparable to the skill required to deflect it. This alone is a sufficient argument to patch this strat since Blizzard has acknowledged this form of imbalance. | ||
|
monk
United States8477 Posts
On April 07 2012 04:13 Teoita wrote: How would you simcity a third like that? On some maps it's pretty straightforward (say, Entombed valley or Shattered Temple), but if the third is a bit more open and maybe even on the low ground (metropolis, cloud kingdom, etc) it seems pretty hard. Either at the front or along the nexus like Hero does. Anything would have been better than what Tails did. On April 07 2012 04:22 SiroKO wrote: Not really. This discussion reminds me of 4 gate during beta, back when the warpgate research time made it the only strat to go. My point is that they will always be players claiming that they exist counters... That you need to put more pressure, take a 3rd sooner etc... but in the end, nothing will really counter it, unless the Zerg messes up. Besides, the skill required to pull it off is by no means comparable to the skill required to deflect it. This alone is a sufficient argument to patch this strat since Blizzard has acknowledged this form of imbalance. Don't see how you think you have enough evidence to conclude that. I do agree, however, that it's much easier to execute from the zerg than to defend. | ||
|
kcdc
United States2311 Posts
On April 07 2012 04:22 SiroKO wrote: Not really. This discussion reminds me of 4 gate during beta, back when the warpgate research time made it the only strat to go. My point is that they will always be players claiming that they exist counters... That you need to put more pressure, take a 3rd sooner etc... but in the end, nothing will really counter it, unless the Zerg messes up. Besides, the skill required to pull it off is by no means comparable to the skill required to deflect it. This alone is a sufficient argument to patch this strat since Blizzard has acknowledged this form of imbalance. It's not going to get patched. This is a consequence of the WG design. WG tech means that P is just as strong attacking as they are defending. If you buff P relative to Z to help P defend the 12 minute roach timing, 2-base all-ins will be over-powered. Protoss is balanced around the WG mechanic. P can have too much stuff early, so their T1 units are weak for cost. If P is going to be just as strong attacking as they are defending, they should probably attack so that they pick when the fight happens. | ||
|
skatbone
United States1005 Posts
| ||
|
aintthatfunny
193 Posts
I was surpised how close it was. | ||
|
Markwerf
Netherlands3728 Posts
On April 07 2012 05:06 kcdc wrote: It's not going to get patched. This is a consequence of the WG design. WG tech means that P is just as strong attacking as they are defending. If you buff P relative to Z to help P defend the 12 minute roach timing, 2-base all-ins will be over-powered. Protoss is balanced around the WG mechanic. P can have too much stuff early, so their T1 units are weak for cost. If P is going to be just as strong attacking as they are defending, they should probably attack so that they pick when the fight happens. This of course is total nonsense... First of all P is not as strong aggresively as they are defensively.. Forcefields, cannons, smart walling, robo and stargate units etc. all make P defensively stronger then aggresively. It really isn't too hard to fix this push without making 2 base pushes too strong, the question is more if it's needed. I haven't seen much evidence at all yet of this push being a problem at the highest level, if anything it's probably more just a map thing at the moment. | ||
|
monk
United States8477 Posts
On April 07 2012 05:12 skatbone wrote: White-Ra trying his hand with the fast 3rd vs the man himself, Stephano. He opened very well, doing a very similar build to what I suggested a few pages ago. Imo if he allin'd off 3 bases with colossi instead of trying to go mothership + colossi from his favorable position, he would have won. | ||
|
Decendos
Germany1341 Posts
hope this will get standard...no more stupid 2 base all ins every game | ||
|
SiroKO
France721 Posts
On April 07 2012 05:35 Decendos wrote: white-ra just showed how to defend the push, the 3rd and be ahead in tech. hope this will get standard...no more stupid 2 base all ins every game Getting a third, genious strat, oh a drone icon. In the end, it was the blind 2 base 7 gates all-in which gave him the win against Stephano (which turned into a lose because of miscontrol). Moral of the story? User was warned for this post | ||
|
monk
United States8477 Posts
On April 07 2012 05:48 SiroKO wrote: Getting a third, genious strat, oh a drone icon. In the end, it was the blind 2 base 7 gates all-in which gave him the win against Stephano (which turned into a lose because of miscontrol). Moral of the story? Wtf are you talking about? You have a probe icon. White-ra was also in really good positions in both games and threw it away both times. | ||
|
Teoita
Italy12248 Posts
In a way it reminds me of the days of gateway expand, when the mantra was "if toss doesn't have his nat by 6minutes he's up to something sneaky". | ||
|
Decendos
Germany1341 Posts
On April 07 2012 05:48 SiroKO wrote: Getting a third, genious strat, oh a drone icon. In the end, it was the blind 2 base 7 gates all-in which gave him the win against Stephano (which turned into a lose because of miscontrol). Moral of the story? rofl drone icon. so what? white-ra did fast third with wall-off + cannons + blink + robo like suggested by 10 people in this thread and it works out really nice and puts toss ahead in tech and lets both z and p get in macro game. | ||
|
aZealot
New Zealand5447 Posts
| ||
|
Skyro
United States1823 Posts
On April 07 2012 01:06 kcdc wrote: Do you have a replay where Z does what I suggested? I looked and didn't find one, but maybe I missed it. I'm hoping to be proven wrong and that zergling pressure off of gasless opening can't force a nexus cancel. I believe that your guide acknowledges that zergling pressure off of a 10 pool can foce a nexus cancel. Can the same pressure off of a 12 pool force the cancel? 14 pool? How late do the first 6 lings have to hit in order for you to be safe? 12 pool isn't much faster than a 14 pool. 2 chronos on your first 2 zealots let them pop before 6 lings hit your natural from a 14 pool. Wall-off from ramp to natural is put in place before lings reach your base so they can't play ring-around-the-rosie. If you lose your pylon you mismicroed. 10 pool hits much faster due to being started before the first OL. You have to count workers to see if you have to cancel nexus or not vs a 10 pool. If it helps you to visualize, you know how one viable way to defend 6 pool is not walling in your main ramp and make them next to your main nexus? Slow lings are pretty terrible. | ||
| ||
