|
On December 22 2010 22:58 Dingotrold wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2010 22:54 Ultramus wrote:On December 22 2010 22:51 Dingotrold wrote:
They attacked the army head-on, from one direction. As opposed to what? Base racing with mutalisks vs marine tank. How are people like you even allowed on the forums. Huh? You don't think flanking is possible on scrap station? In my opinion, it's just retarded to claim that the zergs played perfectly. There are an infinite number of possibilities - the composition Zergs went for has been the best vs T so far, that doesn't mean it's perfect.
What if the terran was checking on the way to zerg's base for any flanking lings? Sometimes it just isn't possible to flank and that shouldn't justify losing when ahead on food.
|
On December 22 2010 22:57 Mainland wrote:Show nested quote +ofcourse it's time to think what zerg can do about it.
not start the terrans inba train again. This is the right way to think about things. Can we please try to focus more on strategy and less on balance. Marine + tank is pretty even with baneling + muta. However well the mutas harass and force stims tip the scale in one way or another. Adding in infestors makes it a super-hard counter. I didn't watch the games, but one 5 game winning streak doesn't mean the games broken. It's just time for those zergs to sit down and get to work to find some good timings to get infestors out or whatever else they can think of that would be more effective.
Infestors are too gas heavy. That would mean cutting back on both muta and baneling production. Also, with tanks sieged and Terran slow pushing, theres now ay you'd be able to fungal. Even if you got one fungal off, medivacs heal. Using fungal in the midst of a battle to prevent marine retreat would be nice. However, again there wouldn't be enough banes / mutas to follow up. Infestors would die after one fungal and thats not cost effective. And once again, you're relying on the Terran to have clumped up his bio forces. MVP had his marines spread out on purpose to preemptively counter bane splash.
The infestor is more of an anti-air unit. to fungal and demobilize air units or drop ships and what not. Their purpose is far different than the defiler of scbw. the defiler complimented zerg melee through dark swarm. infestor's fungal is basically ensnare. theres a reason why queens weren't used in scbw.
|
so anyone put of VODs of this yet? 
|
United Kingdom38257 Posts
On December 22 2010 22:57 Mainland wrote:Show nested quote +ofcourse it's time to think what zerg can do about it.
not start the terrans inba train again. This is the right way to think about things. Can we please try to focus more on strategy and less on balance. Marine + tank is pretty even with baneling + muta. However well the mutas harass and force stims tip the scale in one way or another. Adding in infestors makes it a super-hard counter. I didn't watch the games, but one 5 game winning streak doesn't mean the games broken. It's just time for those zergs to sit down and get to work to find some good timings to get infestors out or whatever else they can think of that would be more effective.
Technically it was a 10 game winning streak, 5 straight Bo3 matches dropping only the first game in the first match. I'd humbly suggest trying to find the VoDs to watch and seeing the way things panned out because I don't think it is as simple to find an alternative as you are making it sound. We saw some infestor play out of Zenio, and they got comprehensively squashed by tank fire before they could get themselves into a position where they could really affect anything in a significant fashion. MvP simply maintaining decent unit spread helps nullify the threat of FG as well.
|
On December 22 2010 22:58 Dingotrold wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2010 22:54 Ultramus wrote:On December 22 2010 22:51 Dingotrold wrote:
They attacked the army head-on, from one direction. As opposed to what? Base racing with mutalisks vs marine tank. How are people like you even allowed on the forums. Huh? You don't think flanking is possible on scrap station? In my opinion, it's just retarded to claim that the zergs played perfectly. There are an infinite number of possibilities - the composition Zergs went for has been the best vs T so far, that doesn't mean it's perfect.
Sigh. How do you flank in that situation, run the lings around the gold and right back into the tanks? I will say Idra was impatient with the push and had the lings/bling/muta attacked simultaneously it may have been different, but that has little to do with flanking. And best so far because there is little variety in zerg compositions, I really want you to sit and tell me that roach hydra or any other ground army is going to win against that.
It brings me back to my other point, there is a cost to teching that eats into your army, getting infestors is a collossal investment and even then they aren't exactly the game changers that HT/ghost are are questionably worth cost if microed perfectly.
IMO many of the posters here are basically saying chemotherapy doesn't always work on cancer, maybe the world's best doctors just haven't tried other options?! See how ridiculous that sounds?
If I had a solution I'd post it, but as a zerg I experience the same issues, and if I played another race I'd defer to those that do at the pro level, of which Idra is in strong stature.
|
On December 22 2010 23:02 lfusion wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2010 22:58 Dingotrold wrote:On December 22 2010 22:54 Ultramus wrote:On December 22 2010 22:51 Dingotrold wrote:
They attacked the army head-on, from one direction. As opposed to what? Base racing with mutalisks vs marine tank. How are people like you even allowed on the forums. Huh? You don't think flanking is possible on scrap station? In my opinion, it's just retarded to claim that the zergs played perfectly. There are an infinite number of possibilities - the composition Zergs went for has been the best vs T so far, that doesn't mean it's perfect. What if the terran was checking on the way to zerg's base for any flanking lings? Sometimes it just isn't possible to flank and that shouldn't justify losing when ahead on food.
Point is, attack head-on from one direction into sieged siege tanks makes you lose when you're ahead on food. That's what the unit does, it's insanely cost effective if it gets in that position. The question should be, what can be done to
a) negate the position of the siege tanks (ie. flanking)
b) negate the siege tanks (rush)
c) prevent the push (attacking)
Since zergs are comfortable never attacking (I suppose they feel they can not win this way), it's obvious that Terrans would try and get the best composition possible and then move out. Since zergs aren't forcing anything from terran (they would claim it's impossible, I think it's premature to make that call), it's surprising they expect anything else.
If you run into tanks you lose, if you fight Marine+Medivac with Mutalisks you lose. It has little to do with food. If you can't find a way to avoid these engagements, you'll lose. Is it impossible for zerg to avoid these engagements? I realize it would be hard to find a solid argument even if it was, but isn't it more likely that the composition actually ISN'T unbeatable?
|
On December 22 2010 22:55 Elwar wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2010 22:46 Grebliv wrote:
the thing is that terran has a reaaaaly hard time doing hard transitions (you can add stuff but 3 rax don't become 3 factorys, they become dead weight) so if you ever give zerg an actual counter he's won already. Protoss routinely open 3gate into 2star into 2robo against zerg. Similar build times for terran tech structures (slightly faster w/o addon or if they are getting swapped onto addon, slightly longer if they build it), similar costs. Terran absolutely can do it. And some do. The current TvZ play isn't forced by lack of options. Its done because it has as of late had a ridiculous win-rate.
well if the win rate is so heavily favored it'll obviously get patched so why whine?
mvp is the first zerg in a while i've seen not just roll over and die to muta ling bling if not going heavy pressure or all-inning so i'm just glad to see the 1rax-fe marine tank thing i'm trying to perform myself to some success work at the highest level.
to call something unbeatable now is ridiculous, 35% chance this will have flipped upside down in the next two or three weeks, i'm sure each and every one of those zergs would have won their games if they were allowed to play them team melee at half speed vs mvp at regular speed, fair? no, but as a point yes; there are always weaknesses, you can always do something better, not miss larva injects by 3 sec or losing a few lings needlessly.
if this was bw mvp would be getting commended on a good showing, sc2 terrnas inba!
before the roach nerf z was the race, then came t, then comes z again 14 hatching every game... crap will continue to go around.
|
On December 22 2010 22:48 Ultramus wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2010 22:39 MrCon wrote:
Zerg lose, whine/balance/QQ ensue. History repeating. Such an insightful response. So tell me what is this huge secret that the best zergs in the world don't know hmm? I'd really LOVE to hear an answer. I want anyone to watch those games and tell me something isn't wrong. Idra played that game literally as perfect as you could, I cannot fathom a better way he could have done that and it showed in the fact that he was ~20 food ahead through the whole game till that push. I want to know what other options he had in that position? Considering you are complaining that we are whining I'm sure you have an answer, no?
I don't agree with MrCon just saying QQ etc, but honestly isn't it just preemptive to yet again say...this strategy is unbreakable.
I mean every GSL we get a couple new strats popping up as the metagame shifts - GSL2 Zergs were "OP" and only were knocked out because of the ZvZs that ended up happening..what changed from GSL2 to now? Only metagame changes. Now, it seems to be shifting from the 2rax inspired play of MarineKing into the more Marine/Tank play of Clide and MVP, no need to complain and say everything is broken just because MVP finally delivered on some results.
|
Damn, missed it.
I gather from skimming a few pages that mvp 5-0'd the Zerg team, with 4 2-0 scores and a 2-1, is that correct?
Who took the map off him and did any Terrans lose before mvp played?
|
On December 22 2010 23:03 CalmDown.Breathe wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2010 22:57 Mainland wrote:ofcourse it's time to think what zerg can do about it.
not start the terrans inba train again. This is the right way to think about things. Can we please try to focus more on strategy and less on balance. Marine + tank is pretty even with baneling + muta. However well the mutas harass and force stims tip the scale in one way or another. Adding in infestors makes it a super-hard counter. I didn't watch the games, but one 5 game winning streak doesn't mean the games broken. It's just time for those zergs to sit down and get to work to find some good timings to get infestors out or whatever else they can think of that would be more effective. Infestors are too gas heavy. That would mean cutting back on both muta and baneling production. Also, with tanks sieged and Terran slow pushing, theres now ay you'd be able to fungal. Even if you got one fungal off, medivacs heal. Using fungal in the midst of a battle to prevent marine retreat would be nice. However, again there wouldn't be enough banes / mutas to follow up. Infestors would die after one fungal and thats not cost effective. And once again, you're relying on the Terran to have clumped up his bio forces. MVP had his marines spread out on purpose to preemptively counter bane splash. The infestor is more of an anti-air unit. to fungal and demobilize air units or drop ships and what not. Their purpose is far different than the defiler of scbw. the defiler complimented zerg melee through dark swarm. infestor's fungal is basically ensnare. theres a reason why queens weren't used in scbw.
Yeah I'm not the best player, so take my suggestions for strategies lightly. I'm sure if infestors don't get out in time, zergs can find something that does. The main point I want to make is that the game isn't solved to the point where someone can legitimately say "If zerg can't beat marine-tank with muta-bling, then the game is broken", which some people in this thread are trying to argue. One point I would contend with you is that I think it's short-sighted to cast off any amount of damage just because "medivacs heal". Damage is damage. If the infestors FG some marines, they'll die faster.
Also another thing to consider is how well MVP's control is relative to his opponents. Lets say for sake of argument that he has the best control of anyone in the world. Then it wouldn't unreasonable for him to win 10 games in a row against the best zergs in world. I'll reemphasize my main point. Some people in this thread are looking at games, and trying to use balance alone to explain and analyze the results and that's not what strategy games are about. And I'm not talking about you CalmDown.Breathe, you're cool for discussing strategy.
|
United Kingdom38257 Posts
On December 22 2010 23:14 cuppatea wrote:
Damn, missed it.
I gather from skimming a few pages that mvp 5-0'd the Zerg team, with 4 2-0 scores and a 2-1, is that correct?
Who took the map off him and did any Terrans lose before mvp played?
Zenio beat him first game on Xel Naga, and no Terrans lost at all.
Full scores were
MvP vs Zenio :: 2-1 (L. Xel Naga || W. Steppes || W. Shakuras)
MvP vs Fruitdealer :: 2-0 (W. Lost Temple || W. Jungle Basin)
MvP vs Leenock :: 2-0 (W. Scrapstatiion || W. Xel Naga)
MvP vs NesTea :: 2-0 (W. Shakuras || W. Steppes)
MvP vs Idra :: 2-0 (W. Scrapstation || W. Delta Quadrant)
|
On December 22 2010 23:09 Dingotrold wrote:
Point is, attack head-on from one direction into sieged siege tanks makes you lose when you're ahead on food. That's what the unit does, it's insanely cost effective if it gets in that position. The question should be, what can be done to
a) negate the position of the siege tanks (ie. flanking)
b) negate the siege tanks (rush)
c) prevent the push (attacking)
Since zergs are comfortable never attacking (I suppose they feel they can not win this way), it's obvious that Terrans would try and get the best composition possible and then move out. Since zergs aren't forcing anything from terran (they would claim it's impossible, I think it's premature to make that call), it's surprising they expect anything else.
If you run into tanks you lose, if you fight Marine+Medivac with Mutalisks you lose. It has little to do with food. If you can't find a way to avoid these engagements, you'll lose. Is it impossible for zerg to avoid these engagements? I realize it would be hard to find a solid argument even if it was, but isn't it more likely that the composition actually ISN'T unbeatable?
Were you watching those games? How in the position MVP was in on scrap station can you flank? I'd love for you to tell me. Zerg can't force anything out of terran for your original point, attacking into siege tanks is suicide, once MVP walled off and had siege tanks at his main and natural the only possible way to force anything is mutalisks, which idra did.
This aspect of the game is why you see great zergs like Dimaga and Sen allining every other game. And with considerably less success than the comparable strategies of the opposing races.
|
On December 22 2010 23:14 Mainland wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2010 23:03 CalmDown.Breathe wrote:On December 22 2010 22:57 Mainland wrote:ofcourse it's time to think what zerg can do about it.
not start the terrans inba train again. This is the right way to think about things. Can we please try to focus more on strategy and less on balance. Marine + tank is pretty even with baneling + muta. However well the mutas harass and force stims tip the scale in one way or another. Adding in infestors makes it a super-hard counter. I didn't watch the games, but one 5 game winning streak doesn't mean the games broken. It's just time for those zergs to sit down and get to work to find some good timings to get infestors out or whatever else they can think of that would be more effective. Infestors are too gas heavy. That would mean cutting back on both muta and baneling production. Also, with tanks sieged and Terran slow pushing, theres now ay you'd be able to fungal. Even if you got one fungal off, medivacs heal. Using fungal in the midst of a battle to prevent marine retreat would be nice. However, again there wouldn't be enough banes / mutas to follow up. Infestors would die after one fungal and thats not cost effective. And once again, you're relying on the Terran to have clumped up his bio forces. MVP had his marines spread out on purpose to preemptively counter bane splash. The infestor is more of an anti-air unit. to fungal and demobilize air units or drop ships and what not. Their purpose is far different than the defiler of scbw. the defiler complimented zerg melee through dark swarm. infestor's fungal is basically ensnare. theres a reason why queens weren't used in scbw. Yeah I'm not the best player, so take my suggestions for strategies lightly. I'm sure if infestors don't get out in time, zergs can find something that does. The main point I want to make is that the game isn't solved to the point where someone can legitimately say "If zerg can't beat marine-tank with muta-bling, then the game is broken", which some people in this thread are trying to argue. One point I would contend with you is that I think it's short-sighted to cast off any amount of damage just because "medivacs heal". Damage is damage. If the infestors FG some marines, they'll die faster.
muta-baneling was the "supposed" counter. thats why the results are so hard to swallow. its like saying someone with a knife took out someone with a gun. sure it can happen once, but five times in a row against the best of the best all in the same manner and fashion?
The only thing I can think of is teching faster to greater spire and getting broodlords to break siege lines and to kill marines with collateral siege splash. ground units are decimated by this build. better muta micro? but mutas aren't really effective against marine medivac in a heads up battle.
Teching up to broodlords, however, is unthinkable since MVP had his army in the midgame. no way to get to broodlords without completely abandoning the rest of your army. Ultras are out of the question since tanks counter ultras and ultra splash is ineffective against marines. burrowed banelings? i mean most of the strats zerg has against terran is "oh i hope they make a mistake".
|
On December 22 2010 23:20 Ultramus wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2010 23:09 Dingotrold wrote:
Point is, attack head-on from one direction into sieged siege tanks makes you lose when you're ahead on food. That's what the unit does, it's insanely cost effective if it gets in that position. The question should be, what can be done to
a) negate the position of the siege tanks (ie. flanking)
b) negate the siege tanks (rush)
c) prevent the push (attacking)
Since zergs are comfortable never attacking (I suppose they feel they can not win this way), it's obvious that Terrans would try and get the best composition possible and then move out. Since zergs aren't forcing anything from terran (they would claim it's impossible, I think it's premature to make that call), it's surprising they expect anything else.
If you run into tanks you lose, if you fight Marine+Medivac with Mutalisks you lose. It has little to do with food. If you can't find a way to avoid these engagements, you'll lose. Is it impossible for zerg to avoid these engagements? I realize it would be hard to find a solid argument even if it was, but isn't it more likely that the composition actually ISN'T unbeatable? Were you watching those games? How in the position MVP was in on scrap station can you flank? I'd love for you to tell me. Zerg can't force anything out of terran for your original point, attacking into siege tanks is suicide, once MVP walled off and had siege tanks at his main and natural the only possible way to force anything is mutalisks, which idra did. This aspect of the game is why you see great zergs like Dimaga and Sen allining every other game. And with considerably less success than the comparable strategies of the opposing races.
Why is the onus on me to prove that the game isn't broken ? You're the one saying it's broken, and the burden of proof should be on you. You offer up these 5 bo3's, I say that MVP is currently the highest ranked player in the world, thus making him the favorite in all of them, and the expected winner. I don't accept this event as proof of anything being broken.
the only possible way to force anything is mutalisks
It's this bullshit rhetoric that's the problem.
|
On December 22 2010 23:20 Ultramus wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2010 23:09 Dingotrold wrote:
Point is, attack head-on from one direction into sieged siege tanks makes you lose when you're ahead on food. That's what the unit does, it's insanely cost effective if it gets in that position. The question should be, what can be done to
a) negate the position of the siege tanks (ie. flanking)
b) negate the siege tanks (rush)
c) prevent the push (attacking)
Since zergs are comfortable never attacking (I suppose they feel they can not win this way), it's obvious that Terrans would try and get the best composition possible and then move out. Since zergs aren't forcing anything from terran (they would claim it's impossible, I think it's premature to make that call), it's surprising they expect anything else.
If you run into tanks you lose, if you fight Marine+Medivac with Mutalisks you lose. It has little to do with food. If you can't find a way to avoid these engagements, you'll lose. Is it impossible for zerg to avoid these engagements? I realize it would be hard to find a solid argument even if it was, but isn't it more likely that the composition actually ISN'T unbeatable? Were you watching those games? How in the position MVP was in on scrap station can you flank? I'd love for you to tell me. Zerg can't force anything out of terran for your original point, attacking into siege tanks is suicide, once MVP walled off and had siege tanks at his main and natural the only possible way to force anything is mutalisks, which idra did. This aspect of the game is why you see great zergs like Dimaga and Sen allining every other game. And with considerably less success than the comparable strategies of the opposing races.
flanking on scrap, for example he could try to go round the gold with some stuff or doing the muta harass tad better or something; try to hit the push at a better time and such, there's always something to do.
while finding problems is decent it really isn't though unless you also seek solutions. The theory is that he only has to delay delay delay and mislead until he's got better stuff than mvp and then he wins (aka inba zerg macro$), the battle went pretty close, a round of slings with the final muta vs marine and 1-2 tank and the game is a whole different story.
once the push is down it's prime time for the zerg.
|
On December 22 2010 23:17 Asha` wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2010 23:14 cuppatea wrote:
Damn, missed it.
I gather from skimming a few pages that mvp 5-0'd the Zerg team, with 4 2-0 scores and a 2-1, is that correct?
Who took the map off him and did any Terrans lose before mvp played? Zenio beat him first game on Xel Naga, and no Terrans lost at all. Full scores were MvP vs Zenio :: 2-1 (L. Xel Naga || W. Steppes || W. Shakuras) MvP vs Fruitdealer :: 2-0 (W. Lost Temple || W. Jungle Basin) MvP vs Leenock :: 2-0 (W. Scrapstatiion || W. Xel Naga) MvP vs NesTea :: 2-0 (W. Shakuras || W. Steppes) MvP vs Idra :: 2-0 (W. Scrapstation || W. Delta Quadrant)
Thanks.
|
And I'm asking if you actually watched the games, explain to me how roaches or hydras will ever force terran away from the same composition MVP did. It won't because it's equally good against it. The mutalisks forced missile turrets, and that had little to no effect on MVP's army strength.
As for those saying match statistics will show something, that isn't true at all. MVP is a step above the rest, and he showed that with proper control marine tank can be nearly invincible, and he showed it vs the best zergs in the world with equally good unit control.
I'm looking at these games specifically for balance because you have to factor in player skill, I'd actually say TvZ is pretty balanced if you completely took away micro. But when you consider the abilities of the top terrans in the world you see that zerg's responses become exponentially worse.
I personally feel that banelings really hold zerg back in this matchup. Before terrans learned such great control of marines we had the invincible mech build which on PAPER was completely imbalanced, but then Zerg learned to magic box and suddenly it was an even exchange with the thors. If people can accept that micro can make a matchup balanced they should just as easily see how it can make one imbalanced.
|
On December 22 2010 23:32 Ultramus wrote:
And I'm asking if you actually watched the games, explain to me how roaches or hydras will ever force terran away from the same composition MVP did. It won't because it's equally good against it. The mutalisks forced missile turrets, and that had little to no effect on MVP's army strength.
As for those saying match statistics will show something, that isn't true at all. MVP is a step above the rest, and he showed that with proper control marine tank can be nearly invincible, and he showed it vs the best zergs in the world with equally good unit control.
I'm looking at these games specifically for balance because you have to factor in player skill, I'd actually say TvZ is pretty balanced if you completely took away micro. But when you consider the abilities of the top terrans in the world you see that zerg's responses become exponentially worse.
I personally feel that banelings really hold zerg back in this matchup. Before terrans learned such great control of marines we had the invincible mech build which on PAPER was completely imbalanced, but then Zerg learned to magic box and suddenly it was an even exchange with the thors. If people can accept that micro can make a matchup balanced they should just as easily see how it can make one imbalanced.
if you remove micro then bling rolls everything, bad micro and they're really good, good micro/positioning and their cost effectiveness is heavily negated.
|
On December 22 2010 23:32 Ultramus wrote:
And I'm asking if you actually watched the games, explain to me how roaches or hydras will ever force terran away from the same composition MVP did. It won't because it's equally good against it. The mutalisks forced missile turrets, and that had little to no effect on MVP's army strength.
As for those saying match statistics will show something, that isn't true at all. MVP is a step above the rest, and he showed that with proper control marine tank can be nearly invincible, and he showed it vs the best zergs in the world with equally good unit control.
I'm looking at these games specifically for balance because you have to factor in player skill, I'd actually say TvZ is pretty balanced if you completely took away micro. But when you consider the abilities of the top terrans in the world you see that zerg's responses become exponentially worse.
I personally feel that banelings really hold zerg back in this matchup. Before terrans learned such great control of marines we had the invincible mech build which on PAPER was completely imbalanced, but then Zerg learned to magic box and suddenly it was an even exchange with the thors. If people can accept that micro can make a matchup balanced they should just as easily see how it can make one imbalanced.
to be honest, i think fruitdealer had the right idea in the first gsl which is better ways of delivering banelings. all Pros agree that the burst damage of the banelings are the only things to counter marine medivac which heals at an absurd rate + high dps. baneling drop on top of bio forces while lings engage and mutas pick off tanks would be ideal. zergs need to be more all in ish imo in the mid to late game. theres no point in having 5k minerals stacked up if you lose everything. go for an all in lose all your ovie drop. reduce drone count to 45 ish through spine crawlers / sacrifice and have a larger ling count. 100 food worth of cracklings = 200 . thats a lot.
|
On December 22 2010 23:32 Ultramus wrote:
And I'm asking if you actually watched the games, explain to me how roaches or hydras will ever force terran away from the same composition MVP did. It won't because it's equally good against it. The mutalisks forced missile turrets, and that had little to no effect on MVP's army strength.
As for those saying match statistics will show something, that isn't true at all. MVP is a step above the rest, and he showed that with proper control marine tank can be nearly invincible, and he showed it vs the best zergs in the world with equally good unit control.
I'm looking at these games specifically for balance because you have to factor in player skill, I'd actually say TvZ is pretty balanced if you completely took away micro. But when you consider the abilities of the top terrans in the world you see that zerg's responses become exponentially worse.
I personally feel that banelings really hold zerg back in this matchup. Before terrans learned such great control of marines we had the invincible mech build which on PAPER was completely imbalanced, but then Zerg learned to magic box and suddenly it was an even exchange with the thors. If people can accept that micro can make a matchup balanced they should just as easily see how it can make one imbalanced.
By this logic, you might as well say that spreading marines is the only way to balance the matchup, since if they were clumped up banelings would LOL over them. Which happened untill MarineKing gave a fuck about counters and just made his favorite unit and made it work. He forced the balance to switch, by outmicroing his opponents... That's something that should be applauded I think, and it should serve as inspiration for any player to overcome counters by outplaying their opponents.
Just in the interest of full disclosure (I guess?) I watched the final Leenock games, and the NesTea and IdrA series. And from what I saw, none of them were able to outplay MVP.
EDIT (from getting annoyed):
And I'm asking if you actually watched the games, explain to me how roaches or hydras will ever force terran away from the same composition MVP did.
The onus is not on me, I am not the one making the claims.
It won't because it's equally good against it.
Don't you see how it's impossible to take you seriously? I realize you're at your wit's end seing all these zergs lose to a terran and not knowing how they could beat him, but not knowing is not something to scorn and get hysterical over. Your 'proof' here is basically saying you are right because you are right, and then you expect me to convince you that you're wrong. It's not a very productive way to find solutions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
