|
Its time to enjoy the matches, keep the whining out of this thread. GL HF!
Also, don't reply to the whining and ignore it: have faith in the mods, we read every post and act swiftly. You're making it worse. Enjoy! |
On April 18 2011 15:23 Shooks wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 15:11 Scila wrote:
Meh, PvZ is so pathetically broken. I just hate that balance is such a "taboo" issue on TL when it's so painfully apparent that Mondragon is a far superior player. Honestly, all Protoss has to do in most games is just sit back and macro up enough Colossus+ whatever and then nothing can stop it :/ When a Zerg is as aggressive as Mondragon, the only thing you really can do as Protoss is defend, you're only saying Mondragon was the superior player because being the aggressor looks more impressive, when infact Cruncher defended the multi prong attacks very well. Stop being an idiot.
Words of wisdom. I dont think many people are giving CrunCher enough credit to his defense, particularly on the Shakuras map. He defended his 3base, worked on securing a 4th which wasn't easy, and when he felt strong enough he pushed, simple as that. Just like the IdrA game, his plan was to defend until he felt he could push. Well played and executed plan by CrunCher in my opinion. He played to his strengths.
|
On April 18 2011 15:42 Tegin wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 15:23 Shooks wrote:On April 18 2011 15:11 Scila wrote:
Meh, PvZ is so pathetically broken. I just hate that balance is such a "taboo" issue on TL when it's so painfully apparent that Mondragon is a far superior player. Honestly, all Protoss has to do in most games is just sit back and macro up enough Colossus+ whatever and then nothing can stop it :/ When a Zerg is as aggressive as Mondragon, the only thing you really can do as Protoss is defend, you're only saying Mondragon was the superior player because being the aggressor looks more impressive, when infact Cruncher defended the multi prong attacks very well. Stop being an idiot. Words of wisdom. I dont think many people are giving CrunCher enough credit to his defense, particularly on the Shakuras map. He defended his 3base, worked on securing a 4th which wasn't easy, and when he felt strong enough he pushed, simple as that. Just like the IdrA game, his plan was to defend until he felt he could push. Well played and executed plan by CrunCher in my opinion. He played to his strengths.
You're forgetting one important thing. 100% of protoss wins are because of imbalance and not a single toss player has even a tiny bit of skill. Furthermore, all protoss players are either "cheesy noobies" or "turtling little bitches."
+ Show Spoiler +If the sarcasm detectors arent working, that was a joke. :D
|
I really liked Mondragons style in game2. Atm there's no counter to the Protoss turtle-into-mass-colossus/voidray/stalker style. But this might be it. Abusing the fact that their army is only good combined and less so when its split up and abusing their poor mobility. I think the only thing which Mondragon might have done better is produce more corruptors and harass with them aswell.
So: drop 2 bases with roaches, attack the front of the base with roaches, send in mass corruptors to pick off colossus when the protoss is splitting his army.
|
I'm running out of players to support and I'm starting to wish all the worst to Cruncher, he is the most boring player ever. Really hope he gets crushed next round, it is obscene that this guy is in the Ro8.
|
Gah, such an anti-climactic 3rd game. Cruncher sure isn't out to make fans. :D
|
On April 18 2011 14:30 Sein wrote:
So Cruncher cannon rushed in 1 game out of 7 games he's played in TSL and he gets this much hate. I'm not the biggest fan of the guy, but give him a break. Just because he took a game off your favorite player with cheese, he isn't some embodiment of all evil. 6-base 90-worker isn't the only correct way to play this game. I don't think anyone here would call cannons OP anyway.
In any case, Mondragon still showed some pretty exciting plays despite losing and I hope to see more of him in future tournaments.
He cannon rushed in 1 game out of 7 because that's the only game where zerg decided to drop expansion first. Ever decent protoss knows there is not way of defending well executed cannon rush that's why he made that. I wouldn't call that a chesse. lol
|
Went to bed after the final game was done, only to wake up to still see people going on and on about imbalance and playermannars and what not.
PvZ is like TvP was a while ago. Terran made bioballs, attacked after # minutes and that was that. It was hard to counter and if you did counter, you were lost anyway because you had to cut economy or tech to stop it. Now protoss found how to counter the bioball and Terrans are looking for other ideas to kill Protoss. Mech, ghosts, mass airplay. They are getting creative.
PvZ is like that at the moment. It seems unstoppable, but as soon as zergs find out proper ways to react , the protoss will need to rethink. Yes yes, people will say its not the same and blabla. It is, games evolve like this all the time. The game is still a baby compared to SCBW. Even tactics there still change. You dont really expect PvZ to be like this till the end of time right?
Look at JulyZerg for example. He's way aggressive and throws lings at you from every angle. As a Protoss player I absolutely hate it when I get picked apart like that. Im still shocked Zergs I play dont poke and prod more. It seems all the tactics they have at the moment is mass roach, mass roach hydra or mutaling. Theres some easy set counters as a Protoss for that. Zergs units are the fastest and most mobile. They also produce fastest and swarm the best. Hardly any Zerg really makes use of all that.
Can everyone please stop arguing about broken matchsups that arent broken, bad players that arent bad players and imba what isnt imba? its so pointless and tbh really boring if you dont bring all you got to the table.
|
Yes, Mondragon's style is what makes zerg powerful.
Protoss right now is semi underpowered (with all the nerfs), simply because Zerg players do not play right. You're NEVER supposed to engage the big Protoss ball directly. You're supposed to poke at Protoss until it dies (which is what Day9 said a long time ago).
Look at how many pro players are using nydus worms. Seriously, not many. Nydus worms were created so you no longer need creep.
Someone needs to develop dual nydus style, just liek Whitera is trying to develop warp prism harass.
|
Even beeing a zerg player, I like so much this imbalance atmosphere. Since the beginning of sc2 it is like this!
Without all those QQing, whine, rage, the mighty fruitdealer, the beast MC and also Nestea, Huk, Dimaga, White-ra won't be hero currently.
When Terran were considered OP, Zerg wins twice the GSL, Huk was a hero too! beating a lot of great terran players(before going to south korea). MC also showed that terran weren't so OP.
Now it seems to be the protoss era, I'm sure that Kas, Boxer or Thorzain will show us some fucking freaking game. Even if a protoss win this tournament, i'm loving TSL!
Zerg did quite well, Morrow and Sen almost got it, and mondi just showed how good and awesome he was.
Too bad that Cruncher is getting so much hate from no brained fan boy. I cheer so much for him against Naniwa, he deserves his wins as much as MC, Adel, Kas, Boxer, Thorzain, Hasuobs !
And I beg all those protoss players to do their best even if people hates them.
Too bad also for TSL admins, haha, they have a lot of work! Don't forget your bottle of vodka and learn by heart the rules of : The Drinking Game !!!
gogo Adel and Boxer!!
|
On April 18 2011 15:58 Bibbit wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 15:42 Tegin wrote:On April 18 2011 15:23 Shooks wrote:On April 18 2011 15:11 Scila wrote:
Meh, PvZ is so pathetically broken. I just hate that balance is such a "taboo" issue on TL when it's so painfully apparent that Mondragon is a far superior player. Honestly, all Protoss has to do in most games is just sit back and macro up enough Colossus+ whatever and then nothing can stop it :/ When a Zerg is as aggressive as Mondragon, the only thing you really can do as Protoss is defend, you're only saying Mondragon was the superior player because being the aggressor looks more impressive, when infact Cruncher defended the multi prong attacks very well. Stop being an idiot. Words of wisdom. I dont think many people are giving CrunCher enough credit to his defense, particularly on the Shakuras map. He defended his 3base, worked on securing a 4th which wasn't easy, and when he felt strong enough he pushed, simple as that. Just like the IdrA game, his plan was to defend until he felt he could push. Well played and executed plan by CrunCher in my opinion. He played to his strengths. You're forgetting one important thing. 100% of protoss wins are because of imbalance and not a single toss player has even a tiny bit of skill. Furthermore, all protoss players are either "cheesy noobies" or "turtling little bitches." + Show Spoiler +If the sarcasm detectors arent working, that was a joke. :D
Lol I was getting mad until I read the spoiler
|
Looking forward to the next SotG just so we can change the fucking subject.
|
On April 18 2011 09:23 Nu11 wrote:
absolutely incredible that cruncher beat Mondragon. Cruncher was vastly outplayed in every single game. The game on Shakuras was a complete joke. one control group A move.
am i only one who thinks cruncher played awesomely in the last game and deserved to win it? sure game 2 was extremely lame, but the results in games 1,3 and 4 were fair enough. i was screaming "CANCEL THE HATCH FFS!!!" when cruncher did that cannon rush
|
On April 18 2011 16:48 ScythedBlade wrote:
Yes, Mondragon's style is what makes zerg powerful.
Protoss right now is semi underpowered (with all the nerfs), simply because Zerg players do not play right. You're NEVER supposed to engage the big Protoss ball directly. You're supposed to poke at Protoss until it dies (which is what Day9 said a long time ago).
Look at how many pro players are using nydus worms. Seriously, not many. Nydus worms were created so you no longer need creep.
Someone needs to develop dual nydus style, just liek Whitera is trying to develop warp prism harass.
The problem with a harrass-based style is that even if you kill all their expos the toss still has a large death ball that you have to kill at some point. Either the toss splits the death ball to defend multi-pronged harrass, which allows the zerg to pick off pieces of it at a time (though this isn't as easy as it sounds because even half a death ball is hard for zerg to kill cost efficiently) or the toss keeps the death ball together and sacrifices expos. This is what Cruncher was doing in game 2, made easier by the easy 3 bases on Shakuras. If the toss has literally 0 economy but a 200/200 collusus/voidray/stalker/sentry mix zerg still has to confront that army at some point. If you engage badly you can throw more than 300 supply against a death ball and still lose (Idra vs. Cruncher on Shakuras from the Ro32 I think, whichever game Idra had an absolute swarm of corrupters but still died). Even if you engage in a superior position (which relies on the toss making a mistake) you still need more than one entire army to kill a deathball.
I agree that their are plenty of aggressive harrass styles that zerg can (and needs to) explore, but zerg also needs to come up with a more cost-efficient way of taking on the deathball too. I wonder what the most effective zerg unit composition is against a death ball, assuming both 1-a, or giving z a nice surround?
|
On April 18 2011 17:23 Silkath wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 16:48 ScythedBlade wrote:
Yes, Mondragon's style is what makes zerg powerful.
Protoss right now is semi underpowered (with all the nerfs), simply because Zerg players do not play right. You're NEVER supposed to engage the big Protoss ball directly. You're supposed to poke at Protoss until it dies (which is what Day9 said a long time ago).
Look at how many pro players are using nydus worms. Seriously, not many. Nydus worms were created so you no longer need creep.
Someone needs to develop dual nydus style, just liek Whitera is trying to develop warp prism harass. The problem with a harrass-based style is that even if you kill all their expos the toss still has a large death ball that you have to kill at some point. Either the toss splits the death ball to defend multi-pronged harrass, which allows the zerg to pick off pieces of it at a time (though this isn't as easy as it sounds because even half a death ball is hard for zerg to kill cost efficiently) or the toss keeps the death ball together and sacrifices expos. This is what Cruncher was doing in game 2, made easier by the easy 3 bases on Shakuras. If the toss has literally 0 economy but a 200/200 collusus/voidray/stalker/sentry mix zerg still has to confront that army at some point. If you engage badly you can throw more than 300 supply against a death ball and still lose (Idra vs. Cruncher on Shakuras from the Ro32 I think, whichever game Idra had an absolute swarm of corrupters but still died). Even if you engage in a superior position (which relies on the toss making a mistake) you still need more than one entire army to kill a deathball. I agree that their are plenty of aggressive harrass styles that zerg can (and needs to) explore, but zerg also needs to come up with a more cost-efficient way of taking on the deathball too. I wonder what the most effective zerg unit composition is against a death ball, assuming both 1-a, or giving z a nice surround?
I dont think there is a cost effective way for Zerg to go against it if they attack move. You need to use drops (either banelings, or just units as when colossus hits them they dont hit 20 units at the same time), flanks, fungal growths, corruptions, focus fire, etc.
|
I think to counter the toss deathball requires an hive. From what day9 said in the tsl yesterday zergs need to/should get hive tech somewhere at late game or mid game.
|
On April 18 2011 17:29 magha wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 17:23 Silkath wrote:On April 18 2011 16:48 ScythedBlade wrote:
Yes, Mondragon's style is what makes zerg powerful.
Protoss right now is semi underpowered (with all the nerfs), simply because Zerg players do not play right. You're NEVER supposed to engage the big Protoss ball directly. You're supposed to poke at Protoss until it dies (which is what Day9 said a long time ago).
Look at how many pro players are using nydus worms. Seriously, not many. Nydus worms were created so you no longer need creep.
Someone needs to develop dual nydus style, just liek Whitera is trying to develop warp prism harass. The problem with a harrass-based style is that even if you kill all their expos the toss still has a large death ball that you have to kill at some point. Either the toss splits the death ball to defend multi-pronged harrass, which allows the zerg to pick off pieces of it at a time (though this isn't as easy as it sounds because even half a death ball is hard for zerg to kill cost efficiently) or the toss keeps the death ball together and sacrifices expos. This is what Cruncher was doing in game 2, made easier by the easy 3 bases on Shakuras. If the toss has literally 0 economy but a 200/200 collusus/voidray/stalker/sentry mix zerg still has to confront that army at some point. If you engage badly you can throw more than 300 supply against a death ball and still lose (Idra vs. Cruncher on Shakuras from the Ro32 I think, whichever game Idra had an absolute swarm of corrupters but still died). Even if you engage in a superior position (which relies on the toss making a mistake) you still need more than one entire army to kill a deathball. I agree that their are plenty of aggressive harrass styles that zerg can (and needs to) explore, but zerg also needs to come up with a more cost-efficient way of taking on the deathball too. I wonder what the most effective zerg unit composition is against a death ball, assuming both 1-a, or giving z a nice surround? I dont think there is a cost effective way for Zerg to go against it if they attack move. You need to use drops (either banelings, or just units as when colossus hits them they dont hit 20 units at the same time), flanks, fungal growths, corruptions, focus fire, etc.
I agree there isn't a cost effective way, but there must be a least inefficient unit composition. If you've killed off their economy then being cost effective is a lot less important. I think zerg just need to figure out a way of killing the death ball (mass corruptors isn't it in my opinion), then worry about how to effectively implement that in an effective strategy. The most effective 1-a unit composition would presumably just get better when microd properly.
|
I don't know if I agree with people saying Cruncher defended well in game 2.
He lost like 3 bases, pretty sure every base Mondragon targeted he either took it out or killed some production buildings. Sorry, all I saw was Mondragon ripping this guy apart before he decided to 1a his stalkers and win.
|
On April 18 2011 17:29 magha wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 17:23 Silkath wrote:On April 18 2011 16:48 ScythedBlade wrote:
Yes, Mondragon's style is what makes zerg powerful.
Protoss right now is semi underpowered (with all the nerfs), simply because Zerg players do not play right. You're NEVER supposed to engage the big Protoss ball directly. You're supposed to poke at Protoss until it dies (which is what Day9 said a long time ago).
Look at how many pro players are using nydus worms. Seriously, not many. Nydus worms were created so you no longer need creep.
Someone needs to develop dual nydus style, just liek Whitera is trying to develop warp prism harass. The problem with a harrass-based style is that even if you kill all their expos the toss still has a large death ball that you have to kill at some point. Either the toss splits the death ball to defend multi-pronged harrass, which allows the zerg to pick off pieces of it at a time (though this isn't as easy as it sounds because even half a death ball is hard for zerg to kill cost efficiently) or the toss keeps the death ball together and sacrifices expos. This is what Cruncher was doing in game 2, made easier by the easy 3 bases on Shakuras. If the toss has literally 0 economy but a 200/200 collusus/voidray/stalker/sentry mix zerg still has to confront that army at some point. If you engage badly you can throw more than 300 supply against a death ball and still lose (Idra vs. Cruncher on Shakuras from the Ro32 I think, whichever game Idra had an absolute swarm of corrupters but still died). Even if you engage in a superior position (which relies on the toss making a mistake) you still need more than one entire army to kill a deathball. I agree that their are plenty of aggressive harrass styles that zerg can (and needs to) explore, but zerg also needs to come up with a more cost-efficient way of taking on the deathball too. I wonder what the most effective zerg unit composition is against a death ball, assuming both 1-a, or giving z a nice surround? I dont think there is a cost effective way for Zerg to go against it if they attack move. You need to use drops (either banelings, or just units as when colossus hits them they dont hit 20 units at the same time), flanks, fungal growths, corruptions, focus fire, etc.
Also what people don't seem to understand is that it's not as easy as just ''Hey make a Nydus worm somewhere and force him to split up!''
If a Zerg sends half his army through a Nydus into his base when Protoss has a deathball, the Protoss can easily just rush the mainbase of the Zerg aswell, since he will have -50% less units defending it, resulting in a even bigger massacre. And the ONLY way for a Zerg to beat a Protoss deathball, is to have a shit ton of larva / resources to reproduce an army. A Zerg army at 200/200 should never beat a Protoss army 200/200 unless the Protoss army did something very wrong.
I've seen so many games and experienced so many games myself where I think ''Hey, let's drop him, hey let's nydus him, hey let's harrass him'' which means splitting up my forces, when the Protoss can just ignore it and attack me head on. Without re-production = Zerg is dead.
Terran and Protoss which have much better defense mechanics (Bunkers, fortresses, force fields, colossus, siege tanks etc.) which Zerg lack. That is also why it's easier for them to harrass safely.
A Protoss can send 30% of his force to an expansion and then goto a choke with his main army and defend against infinity of Zerg units as long as they don't have Broodlords.
What imo Zerg needs to defeat a deathball is:
1. A large map
2. A very good angle
3. Tons of resources and larva ready to make units
4. Broodlords (A lot of them, 3-4 won't make a difference, also imo Ultralisks currently are useless. They spend more time bugging and walking around then actually attacking.)
I really hope new ways to beat it will come up.
|
My personal view.
I find it ridicilous saying that ZvP doesn't need a look into balance wise. It's so apparent that if a zerg wins he really must put on a excellent game without a single mistake, whilst a protoss just has to get that timing push where a zerg is weak or defend until he has an unstoppable force.
In short. Everytime i see a zerg win over a toss, it seems so hard whilst seeing a toss beat a zerg it's so often just a steamroll with an a-move.
|
I dont really play so can someone please explain to me why zergs take on fully charged void rays with corruptors when there are only 3 colossi on the field. Wouldnt they be able to target down the colossi and engage with roach/hydra vs the void rays/ground army considering the hydras have the dps to take all those small units down effectively?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
