| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Tournaments |
|
L3g3nd_
New Zealand10461 Posts
On May 30 2011 21:02 Hider wrote: Your obv. not a terran player. Because you cant retreat with siege tanks. IF you unsige zergs 1a and you die without killing shit. what? i said or reinforce. personally i think reinforce is the best option. but in some situations retreating is the right thing to do | ||
|
epoc
Finland1190 Posts
On May 30 2011 20:51 thopol wrote: That series was amazing. Coca would have won against many players with that strategy. The thing is, there isn't a worse player to bust out a super unique style against. Nada is very smart and adaptive and he evolved his play a great deal over the first game. In the second game, he could take it into consideration in a portion of the game where development choices are more important. That said, Nada's mechanics were on par with his assessment and decisionmaking. His marine splitting was solid, his prioritizing in big battles was better than many players. Super fun to watch, and very very high level overall. I don't think its that complicated. Nada was the better player and he had good marine and siege tank micro which is hard to overcome with zerg. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9447 Posts
On May 30 2011 21:04 L3g3nd_ wrote: what? i said or reinforce. personally i think reinforce is the best option. but in some situations retreating is the right thing to do Retreating obv. was not the right think to do here. Reinforcing is not safe as well, as zerg can counter ( I know he was not doing that, but he could have, and then Nada would have been pretty dead). | ||
|
gh0un
601 Posts
Even if they did connect, its still the same value of resources lost. Actually zerg loses gas while terran doesnt. Banes really arent the counter to marines, doesnt matter how many upgrades. Unless they are burrowed and manage to take out marines cost efficiently. The idea of a suicidal unit as a cost efficient counter is only valid if the unit is cheaper than the one it is supposed to counter, or if the splash is big enough to take out atleast an equal amount of units. For banes only the second part is valid, and even then it doesnt really work out because they are melee units that run slower than the units they want to counter (which are ranged units on top of that), making it possible to lose all banes before any single one actually hits anything. With scourge the concept of a suicidal unit worked much better, because they were cheaper and faster than the units they were supposed to counter, therefore following the above rule (both parts are true for scourge). Speedling mixed in with a few banes (+Infestors), or rather roach with banes (+Infestors), is actually a much better composition against marines. I really dont like how zerg needs to spend so much gas to counter a t1 unit that doesnt cost any gas and is as spammable as zerglings, when all terran needs to do to counter zergs t1 unit, is to get some marines. Melee units being slower than ranged units IS a fundamental game design flaw, unless the melee units have signifcantly more health. The second part isnt true for zerglings, therefore the first part must be true, and indeed the first part is true for zerglings. Its completely not true for banelings however, they have less health, less speed, and no range. Thats the reason why we see terrans massing marines after marines, even though their opponent already has banes out: they dont give a shit. | ||
|
L3g3nd_
New Zealand10461 Posts
On May 30 2011 21:11 Hider wrote: Retreating obv. was not the right think to do here. Reinforcing is not safe as well, as zerg can counter ( I know he was not doing that, but he could have, and then Nada would have been pretty dead). so youre saying he cant retreat he cant reinforce and he cant push in, and yet it was the right thing to do even though he was super cost inefficient (which is a big nono vs 3base zerg) | ||
|
DisaFear
Australia4074 Posts
On May 30 2011 21:13 gh0un wrote: Speedling mixed in with a few banes (+Infestors), or rather roach with banes (+Infestors), is actually a much better composition against marines. PsyStarcraft keeps telling us this over and over again | ||
|
kaztah
Norway1221 Posts
On May 30 2011 21:16 L3g3nd_ wrote: so youre saying he cant retreat he cant reinforce and he cant push in, and yet it was the right thing to do even though he was super cost inefficient (which is a big nono vs 3base zerg) Why is it a big nono vs a 3 base zerg when he also was on 3 base? He limited the zerg on just 3 base gas, he kept himself on equal bases, he completely fucked up his creep spread and he could comfortably power up his infrastructure at home while keeping good tab on the zerg army and economy. He basicly caught up with worker disadvantage while the zerg was massing enough units to completely crush the army and he got his production and upgrades rolling for basicly the cost of one small army. he was like 15 supply behind after the attack from zerg was done, and he had more then enough tanks back at home to never die to a counterattack. It was a well done contain that limited the zerg for the rest of the game to stay on equal bases with the terran and have suboptimal creep spread. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9447 Posts
On May 30 2011 21:16 L3g3nd_ wrote: so youre saying he cant retreat he cant reinforce and he cant push in, and yet it was the right thing to do even though he was super cost inefficient (which is a big nono vs 3base zerg) Where did I say it was the right thing to do? | ||
|
L3g3nd_
New Zealand10461 Posts
fuck it. good night all, fun games <3 tastosis | ||
|
PsYLaR
Canada49 Posts
| ||
|
jinixxx123
543 Posts
i think the whole matchup is really decided on the maps to be quite frank. anyway, im sad jinro is out. what the hell man. | ||
|
mustache
Switzerland309 Posts
On May 30 2011 21:13 gh0un wrote: Even if they did connect, its still the same value of resources lost. Actually zerg loses gas while terran doesnt. Banes really arent the counter to marines, doesnt matter how many upgrades. Unless they are burrowed and manage to take out marines cost efficiently. The idea of a suicidal unit as a cost efficient counter is only valid if the unit is cheaper than the one it is supposed to counter, or if the splash is big enough to take out atleast an equal amount of units. For banes only the second part is valid, and even then it doesnt really work out because they are melee units that run slower than the units they want to counter (which are ranged units on top of that), making it possible to lose all banes before any single one actually hits anything. With scourge the concept of a suicidal unit worked much better, because they were cheaper and faster than the units they were supposed to counter, therefore following the above rule (both parts are true for scourge). Speedling mixed in with a few banes (+Infestors), or rather roach with banes (+Infestors), is actually a much better composition against marines. I really dont like how zerg needs to spend so much gas to counter a t1 unit that doesnt cost any gas and is as spammable as zerglings, when all terran needs to do to counter zergs t1 unit, is to get some marines. Melee units being slower than ranged units IS a fundamental game design flaw, unless the melee units have signifcantly more health. The second part isnt true for zerglings, therefore the first part must be true, and indeed the first part is true for zerglings. Its completely not true for banelings however, they have less health, less speed, and no range. Thats the reason why we see terrans massing marines after marines, even though their opponent already has banes out: they dont give a shit. it's useless to compare how cost effective banelings are vs marines simply because terran and zerg are different races, and zerg usually has more bases resulting in more gas etc your tier comaprison is useless too, they're different races and play differently also on creep stimmed marines are slower than speedbanes banes are great vs marines, but you cant expect to beat a sieged tank marine composition by running lings banes and mutas at it, which doesnt change the fact that banes are amazing against marines. you have to pick it apart. tank marine is immobile, but it's strong. | ||
|
Deekin[
Serbia1713 Posts
And NaDa <3, you will take the whole thing! | ||
|
hamling
United Kingdom26 Posts
| ||
|
KaRath_
Australia245 Posts
I am a huge Jinro fan, and I can't wait to see him back in full form. I'll be waiting and counting the seconds until you're back there, Jinro. | ||
|
3 Lions
United States3705 Posts
| ||
|
baldgye
United Kingdom1108 Posts
On May 30 2011 22:24 KaRath_ wrote: Just have to be honest here and I don't want to sound like an absolute idiot, but I think it's a good thing Jinro dropped down to Code A. Although he's a great player (there's no denying that, he made Ro4 twice in a row for Code S) the form slump is really getting to him. He needs some victories in Code A, possibly getting to the Ro8 to regain his form. I am a huge Jinro fan, and I can't wait to see him back in full form. I'll be waiting and counting the seconds until you're back there, Jinro. Yeah maybe your right, I'm just super gutted for jinro he's been so good for so long and for him to have such a long slump it's just sad to watch... I really hope that he is able to get back on his feet in codeA, because when jinro is good he's a beast | ||
|
gh0un
601 Posts
On May 30 2011 22:09 mustache wrote: it's useless to compare how cost effective banelings are vs marines simply because terran and zerg are different races, and zerg usually has more bases resulting in more gas etc Let me just dismantle that argument right here right now: If zerg could build ultralisks for 50 minerals, would they be cost efficient versus marines? See what i did there? Think before you post some bullshit. They are different races, but they have to face each other, therefore you have to compare unit composition versus unit composition or unit vs unit in order to determine what the best solution is to a particular problem. | ||
|
st3roids
Greece538 Posts
he was like massing banes vs tanks. the sacrifice for banes v muta is necessary. obviously you need banes, but you really need muta too. pure ling/bane will never work. Watch idra ZvT, he always has a flock of 25 or so muta, Spare me with idra , hes not that good to begin with . Muta cost 4 times the baneling cost u cant have both , on top of that vs any terran with above 120 apm you need infestors to keep marines in place , you cant have all of these unless you siting in 4 bases . Any descent player wont let a zerg on 4 bases uniterepted and thats the thing dont let zerg have 4-5 bases. also how many utilizes good drops nowdays let alone the whole terran arsenal ? | ||
|
Micket
United Kingdom2163 Posts
Terran and Protoss players need to stop saying Zerg players shouldn't play greedy. When your counter unit to the bulk of the Terran army is not cost effective, you need a bigger economy. If you are playing unnecessarily safe to not look stupid, you will just end up getting rolled by an equal foe. In my opinion, Nada has excellent decision making and utilises 2 rax better than nearly all other Terrans. Other Terrans are predictable; they correctly force Zerg to make zerglings/spine, but then they make that investment worthwhile by bunker rushing. Nada always puts down the cc really early and fakes the pressure. If zerg does not respect the 2 rax, he has the option to bunker rush, but if Zerg makes the appropriate units, Nada retreats and takes his economic lead. Slow lings cannot chase marines and scvs off creep very easily. I will admit the infestor is slightly different and eats marines and infests them, but I feel that Terran players are starting to learn how to deal with them better, by taking map control and having a high siege tank count. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Other Games |
|
GSL
Replay Cast
WardiTV Weekly
PiGosaur Cup
The PondCast
Replay Cast
CrankTV Team League
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
CrankTV Team League
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
