EPTOfficial State of the Game Podcast Thread - Page 984
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
SgtPepper
United States568 Posts
| ||
|
loveeholicce
Korea (South)785 Posts
On May 05 2011 06:42 Yaotzin wrote: Yes. Do you have any idea how Zerg larvae production works? I commented on holding a 1base allin, not saturating a natural. Stop changing the subject. You don't need it if they're 1base allining. Build another queen if you want to spread creep. You probably shouldn't sacrifice an inject for that anyway. Pros do it for the same reason Protosses and Terrans do it: fast expanding is way better than 1basing. They don't do it for production (again, excepting a ling heavy requirement). You simply don't need to. If Z stays on 1 base then that 1 base all in isn't all in anymore. The player just expands and hes ahead because zerg really has no offensive capability to punish that expansion off 1 base unless its a roach all in but those are easy to scout and nullify. Zerg needs to have that extra base up because we need faster saturation because we need a better economy to stay competitive. | ||
|
teacash
Canada494 Posts
painful | ||
|
rpgalon
Brazil1069 Posts
On May 05 2011 10:16 Asparagus wrote: define risky, and define "punishing" zergs don't have an option called "pressure", it's called "all-in" because we can't simultaneously build units, build structures, and build drones to apply "some pressure" every unit built, due to larva mechanic is a drone behind. Protoss have something called "pressure" it's early zealot/stalker feign to force lings. every XvZ guide has this line in it: "feign pressure, keep the towers, force lings so he can't drone and get ahead or keep up in econ, <execute whatever build listed in strat forum> and you should be ahead and win if you don't mess up or he's just not better than you" so we have to all-in to punish a slightly risky build while terran and toss can hide their tech and control the pace of the match if we choose to play risky? and if we defend it we're back to an even game because by the time we get the units to counter attack the nexus is down at the nat and. sentries. period. if you decide roach/ling aggression within the first 10 minutes to "punish" a risky build (Assuming you scout it) then you're all-in. why is this still an argument. disagree, zerg can apply pressure, and protoss pressure is far more "all-in" than zerg. almost all pro ZvP, where the P was agressive early game, if Z manages to defend well, it's game over. protoss have many all-ins and timing push builds, cus any attack protoss does, if defended, the game is almost over, so protoss have to do a really good one. stargate builds are becoming more and more standard, cus with air protoss can put pressure on zerg without doing a game ending attack | ||
|
Asparagus
United States269 Posts
On May 05 2011 10:32 rpgalon wrote: disagree, zerg can apply pressure, and protoss pressure is far more "all-in" than zerg. almost all pro ZvP, where the P was agressive early game, if Z manages to defend well, it's game over. protoss have many all-ins and timing push builds, cus any attack protoss does, if defended, the game is almost over, so protoss have to do a really good one. stargate builds are becoming more and more standard, cus with air protoss can put pressure on zerg without doing a game ending attack like july zerg vs mc recently? losira games for zvt? that's at least more recent than the 2 zerg gsl champs every other race uses in every discussion. | ||
|
PGriff
United States119 Posts
On May 05 2011 10:04 Kich wrote: This is exactly what I'm referring to. Why does protoss take gas earlier than Zerg? With what are you using those minerals? In many zerg games I see, I watch the Zerg float (even Idra mind you) over 700 minerals almost constantly. What I see them limited by is their gas. You referenced mutalisks, this is far, far, far beyond what Idra is talking about. He's specifically referring to the early game, Mutalisks are way past this. Roaches cost 75 minerals and 25 gas--I think you can afford to get a second gas and throw some money towards lair and an overseer. If you genuinely don't think you can, why not? Why are you pigeon-holed into holding off on your second gas for so long? Examine your own replays as a zerg, how many minerals are you floating at any given time past 5 minutes? Do you think that mining from a second gas would be so detrimental to your early game that you would be worse off with more information, or are you better off with less information. If you find yourself in the latter, then what exactly is the issue to begin with? *Edited, better phrasing* It's the larvae mechanic that forces you to float minerals, not "roaches only cost 75 minerals" off two base there is an explosion of 8 larvae at once w/ 2 queens. Making only lings or drones would cost 400 minerals, 8 roaches would cost 600 minerals. this is only w/ the extra larvae from queens not even counting the 3 constant larvae (1 per 15 sec) of a hatchery. You are watching idra float several hundred minerals, but it is this impulse-based zerg economy that forces him into this situation. To use your own words, watch his replays and you will see when he floats over 600 minerals, he is back under 100 within 30 seconds or a minute when the larvae pop. | ||
|
Asparagus
United States269 Posts
On May 05 2011 10:38 PGriff wrote: It's the larvae mechanic that forces you to float minerals, not "roaches only cost 75 minerals" off two base there is an explosion of 8 larvae at once w/ 2 queens. Making only lings or drones would cost 400 minerals, 8 roaches would cost 600 minerals. this is only w/ the extra larvae from queens not even counting the 3 constant larvae (1 per 15 sec) of a hatchery. You are watching idra float several hundred minerals, but it is this impulse-based zerg economy that forces him into this situation. To use your own words, watch his replays and you will see when he floats over 600 minerals, he is back under 100 within 30 seconds or a minute when the larvae pop. idra on average floats around 70 minerals, the number is only that high because in lategame battles it gets up to 300 sometimes. | ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On May 05 2011 10:17 rpgalon wrote: day 9 plays random, idra is zerg and very well known for complaining since BW I don't think it's because Day9 plays random, I think it's because he (and iNc) were top American Zergs in BW and they completely understand the problem of limited and slow Zerg scouting options. The main difference is that more BW maps had small ledges/walls around bases specifically designed for OL's and the T options were slightly more limited. But IdrA pretending like it's only a SC2 issue is ridiculous and they know it. Someone should load up Destination or one of the other BW maps and compare them. | ||
|
windsupernova
Mexico5280 Posts
| ||
|
Seldon
90 Posts
On May 05 2011 10:47 windsupernova wrote: Just one question for the BW guys as I never played it competitively. Since many people are saying that the larvae mechanic in SC2 is just too risk based how did BW Zerg players managed?Were the Sunken Colonies that good? Pretty much that, yeah. | ||
|
Tarot
Canada440 Posts
On May 05 2011 10:41 Jibba wrote: I don't think it's because Day9 plays random, I think it's because he (and iNc) were top American Zergs in BW and they completely understand the problem of limited and slow Zerg scouting options. The main difference is that more BW maps had small ledges/walls around bases specifically designed for OL's and the T options were slightly more limited. But IdrA pretending like it's only a SC2 issue is ridiculous and they know it. Someone should load up Destination or one of the other BW maps and compare them. Oh wow. I completely forgot about all those ledges in BW. That'll really help Zergs with the scouting issue. But this just makes me feel more depressed about the current map pool situation... I guess IdrA's complaint is kind of valid given the current map pool. And it seems that Blizzard will be more likely to balance the game by changing units rather than balancing it through maps.  | ||
|
rO_Or
United States306 Posts
Day9 repeating "I don't understand" and "I just don't agree" over and over again until he decided to be quiet is a pretty clear indication that he had nothing legitimate to say. When asked for any solution to the problem or a specific game or player to look to, Day9 was at a loss for words. Day9 admitted that he has been busy lately and hasn't watched IdrA's games. What more can I say? I'm a huge Day9 fan and I watch his dailies because I respect his analysis, knowledge and experience but yesterday on SOTG it was painfully obvious that he didn't know what he was talking about. | ||
|
Leporello
United States2845 Posts
Made the balance discussion compelling in comparison. But poor Tasteless. Calls in, just to have to listen to bickering. Is that not bad manners? The host should of put an end to that a while ago. Maybe it's a discussion that needed to happen - but I don't see what was really learned from it by any of us. Probably a better forum for it somewhere else. ----- As for Day9, he, to me, is best known as a teacher of Starcraft basics. As such, his whole position on the game is that people need to try new things and push their ideas of what the game is. IdrA on the other hand, is a professional player of pretty much the highest order. So IdrA is logically trying to dissect parts of the game into absolutes. It's just a complete opposite approach to the game. I personally think IdrA is basically 100% correct, but it's better for people (myself included) to take Day9's approach, and assume that the game is inherently balanced and you just need to learn what that balance is. | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
Spine Crawlers and Sunken Colonies kill marines in the same number of hits, but I think Spine Crawlers actually do higher DPS. Sunkens had a larger range though. Macro hatches were also common in a lot of builds. | ||
|
mahnini
United States6862 Posts
On May 05 2011 10:58 Jibba wrote: Spine Crawlers and Sunken Colonies kill marines in the same number of hits, but I think Spine Crawlers actually do higher DPS. Sunkens had a larger range though. Macro hatches were also common in a lot of builds. you could also make creep colonies without committing the full 100 minerals until you absolutely needed too. the moment you saw a force move out from your opponents natural you could start the sunken and it would finish before or just in time. can't do that with spine crawlers unfortunately. | ||
|
Tabbris
Bangladesh2839 Posts
On May 05 2011 10:41 Jibba wrote: I don't think it's because Day9 plays random, I think it's because he (and iNc) were top American Zergs in BW and they completely understand the problem of limited and slow Zerg scouting options. The main difference is that more BW maps had small ledges/walls around bases specifically designed for OL's and the T options were slightly more limited. But IdrA pretending like it's only a SC2 issue is ridiculous and they know it. Someone should load up Destination or one of the other BW maps and compare them. I dont think it has to do with map at all. Ts just have so many aggressive options because of the mule and the Reactor. Lets look at bw. The only real timing from my limited experience in bw was A 9 minute 1 base push, 2 port wraith and maybe a vulture rush? But Zergs could preemptively make colonys and then make a sunken if they needed it. Spines however take way to long to rely on to stop a marine marauder/Hellion marauder pushes. 2 port wraith was pretty easy to deal with since Hydras didnt require a lair. And sure we have queens but we still need freaking detection if its cloak because ovis dont have detection anymore. It is almost like a complete guessing game. And if the T isnt good enough to kill the overlord before it gets into a good position you still hope to god that the 4 marines don kill it before it sees anything, I may be totally wrong but i dont think ledges are the issue here. And i do feel that its just sometimes a guessing game | ||
|
rO_Or
United States306 Posts
| ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
On May 05 2011 10:47 windsupernova wrote: Just one question for the BW guys as I never played it competitively. Since many people are saying that the larvae mechanic in SC2 is just too risk based how did BW Zerg players managed?Were the Sunken Colonies that good? The other little wrinkle was that you could preemptively put down creep colonies and then morph them to sunkens at the first sign of aggression; they'd be done by the time the enemy marine/protoss force arrived (though it was much more common in ZvT, though). If they retreated, you could usually cancel. Note that, as far as I can remember, the best players were the ones who toed the line of putting up creep colonies as late as possible and morphed the sunkens as late as possible. | ||
|
iSTime
1579 Posts
On May 05 2011 10:56 rO_Or wrote: Day9 repeating "I don't understand" and "I just don't agree" over and over again until he decided to be quiet is a pretty clear indication that he had nothing legitimate to say. When asked for any solution to the problem or a specific game or player to look to, Day9 was at a loss for words. Day9 admitted that he has been busy lately and hasn't watched IdrA's games. What more can I say? I'm a huge Day9 fan and I watch his dailies because I respect his analysis, knowledge and experience but yesterday on SOTG it was painfully obvious that he didn't know what he was talking about. Or maybe he is just being humble? Obviously day[9] does not have as much SC2 experience, and hence would get completely destroyed in any live debate about balance. But also, IdrA tends to speak as if he understands everything, and that everything about zerg in SC2 has been explored. It's impossible to win a live public debate when you show humility against someone who portrays nothing but certainty and confidence, even if you are correct. | ||
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On May 05 2011 10:56 rO_Or wrote: Day9 repeating "I don't understand" and "I just don't agree" over and over again until he decided to be quiet is a pretty clear indication that he had nothing legitimate to say. When asked for any solution to the problem or a specific game or player to look to, Day9 was at a loss for words. Day9 admitted that he has been busy lately and hasn't watched IdrA's games. What more can I say? I'm a huge Day9 fan and I watch his dailies because I respect his analysis, knowledge and experience but yesterday on SOTG it was painfully obvious that he didn't know what he was talking about. You don't understand how logic works, do you? IdrA was, as Day9 said, venting. He was complaining about the issues as he sees it, which is fine, for venting. To have a balance discussion, you need to sit down and examine all aspects of the game as a whole, not just mention a few problems, something that they didn't have time for, and Day9 knows that to address the issues IdrA brought up would require a far deeper analysis, and that there are possible solutions, tactics and strategies that players haven't invented yet. IdrA's complaints are isolated, not holistic. IdrA's complaints basically come down to "I can't get always get an advantage over my opponent no matter what just by having better mechanics than they do, and I don't like that." Well, yeah, players take risks to gain advantages, if you refuse to take such risks, you fall behind. What do you want, to be perfectly safe against any form of early aggression AND to be greedy enough to keep up/surpass a fast expanding enemy? | ||
| ||
