EPTAn Analysis of FruitDealer. Why he's so good! - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
SenatorTod
South Africa7 Posts
| ||
|
kojinshugi
Estonia2559 Posts
| ||
|
Fa1nT
United States3423 Posts
| ||
|
SenatorTod
South Africa7 Posts
| ||
|
awesomoecalypse
United States2235 Posts
Terrans are the race that decide with force that Zerg need counter with. If it is the other way around, the Terran is not playing correctly Certainly, that is the way the matchup usually goes. However, what this thread points out is that that is not how Cool plays. Cool is very aggressive. One thing I noticed is that he often uses aggression to defend. That is, the enemy will start a push towards Cool's base, and rather than either meeting them in the middle or fighting in his own base, he'd run units around the side and up to the enemy's base, forcing their army to return to defend. Another thing I picked up on is how much emphasis Cool places on getting a good surround. I mean, every Zerg knows that surrounding is important. But Cool treats it as *essential*. He will happily engage with half an army just to be able to send his other half around the back for a surround. That IdrA style of just running waves and waves of units directly at the enemy and relying on economy to allow him to brute force his way to a victory is the exact opposite of how Cool plays. The last thing, of course, is baneling drops. I don't think there was a single match where Cool made banelings where he didn't drop them. | ||
|
SmoKim
Denmark10305 Posts
i would edit that out if i was you | ||
|
Nazza
Australia1654 Posts
On October 07 2010 05:36 awesomoecalypse wrote: Certainly, that is the way the matchup usually goes. However, what this thread points out is that that is not how Cool plays. Cool is very aggressive. One thing I noticed is that he often uses aggression to defend. That is, the enemy will start a push towards Cool's base, and rather than either meeting them in the middle or fighting in his own base, he'd run units around the side and up to the enemy's base, forcing their army to return to defend. Another thing I picked up on is how much emphasis Cool places on getting a good surround. I mean, every Zerg knows that surrounding is important. But Cool treats it as *essential*. He will happily engage with half an army just to be able to send his other half around the back for a surround. That IdrA style of just running waves and waves of units directly at the enemy and relying on economy to allow him to brute force his way to a victory is the exact opposite of how Cool plays. The last thing, of course, is baneling drops. I don't think there was a single match where Cool made banelings where he didn't drop them. Baneling drops are the 3rd flank. Not to mention he does all this whilst fungal growthing the entire mech ball. | ||
|
Jaal
United States61 Posts
On October 07 2010 04:27 hoovehand wrote: i do think that the metagame is too strong atm... people refuse to think for themselves. "WTF SOME 1500 DIAMOND GUY COMPLAINED ABOUT PLANETARY FORTRESS!!! THAT MUST MEAN ITS IMBALANCED!!!!".. then they go play their bronze league match and BM some guy who happened to win while having a planetary fortress up. the most successful players seem to be the unorthodox... tester, rainbow and cool are all very unique style... they're rock solid, but it's the ability to think outside the box which takes them to the next level. What excactly is "the metagame"? I see this word getting tossed around a lot around here. | ||
|
Fa1nT
United States3423 Posts
On October 07 2010 05:36 awesomoecalypse wrote: Cool is very aggressive. One thing I noticed is that he often uses aggression to defend. That is, the enemy will start a push towards Cool's base, and rather than either meeting them in the middle or fighting in his own base, he'd run units around the side and up to the enemy's base, forcing their army to return to defend. Another thing I picked up on is how much emphasis Cool places on getting a good surround. I mean, every Zerg knows that surrounding is important. But Cool treats it as *essential*. He will happily engage with half an army just to be able to send his other half around the back for a surround. That IdrA style of just running waves and waves of units directly at the enemy and relying on economy to allow him to brute force his way to a victory is the exact opposite of how Cool plays. The last thing, of course, is baneling drops. I don't think there was a single match where Cool made banelings where he didn't drop them. From what I saw, Fruit didn't even HAVE a sizable army in most of his matches to defend until the enemy pushed out... which was usually so late that Fruit had 3-4 bases to pump an army instantly.. I have no idea what he would have done if the terran just attacked with an early thor/bio push around when Fruit takes his 3rd base and has no infestors or ultra out yet. Basically all he had in a lot of matches was a few banelings, a few zerglings, and 5-10 muta. People who try to emulate Fruit on ladder lose because terrans on ladder do not play as passively as TOP or ITR did in their GSL matches. You say they played passively because Fruit forced them to do so with "pressure", but putting pressure on terrans (who specialize in defense) is kinda.... difficult. | ||
|
Playboy.
40 Posts
| ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
Fruit reacted by doing the same. He attempted to do some forcing with mutas but of course he couldn't because of thors This stood out to me, I think you're missing the importance of those mutalisks a little bit. They did TONS for the match-up. By making 4-5 mutas Fruitdealer is able to essentially say to his opponent, if you don't make turrets or have thor/marine I will win this game because I have mutas. Since Hope had units that can shoot up, Fruit didn't need to make more mutas and could just use his mutas for scouting, light harassment, and what not. It's essentially Fruit saying, "I want you to have Thors or marines in your unit composition because I feel comfortable fighting those units". If Fruit didn't make the spire and air units it frees Hope to go with tank/hellion, hellion/marauder, or hellion/tank unit compositions which can be very difficult to handle using a ground only composition. Instead fruit opens the safer infestors or roaches, but makes the spire and puts an ultimatum on his opponent. If his opponent has tried to be greedy with his composition then instead of having the advantage he pretty much instantly loses. | ||
|
freelander
Hungary4707 Posts
On October 07 2010 05:43 Jaal wrote: What excactly is "the metagame"? I see this word getting tossed around a lot around here. metagame [game behind the game] means the current view of viable strategies and mindgames | ||
|
Jh
Finland151 Posts
On October 07 2010 05:47 Playboy. wrote: Please analyze game 4. I want to know why he lose. Is it because of hydra? You explain why he win but it would give me a clear understand if I can compare it to why he lost game 4. Q: You said you had prepared a special strat for Desert Oasis, what was it? A: People don't use hydralisks much, so I was going to use them in game four and seven. However I started getting behind in the early game, and Sung-jae hyung started his harass very fast so my plans got messed up. Terran picked an economy heavy build, while I was spending too much gas, which didn't come together well for me. When my opponent starting dominating the game, I knew I was going to lose. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=157567 | ||
|
TzTz
Germany511 Posts
| ||
|
Gentso
United States2218 Posts
Forcing for my post can be defined as aggression that results in opponent unit production, map control, and contain. | ||
|
Fodder03
Canada142 Posts
Fruit dealer, defends and counters... thats it, we all do that, its not something new and spectacular. He makes the right choices and has amazing game sense, which is why he wins. Forcing is going muta to FORCE the terran to make marines, which u easily counter with banelings, and to FORCE him to waste money on turrets (also buying time). Defending and attack and then applying some pressure is NOT forcing... its pressure, unless u think you are FORCING him to defend... :S Defending vs hellions with roaches and then applying pressure doesnt "force" anything nor is it a reaction, its defending an attack and then if u have the units its applying pressure. He does react well to drops, he reacts to what he scouts, calling defending "reacting" is foolish. Calling general aggression "forcing" is also rather foolish. | ||
|
Gentso
United States2218 Posts
On October 07 2010 06:22 Fodder03 wrote: I think ur use of the words "force" and "react" are pretty skewed, i dont know if u are trying to sound smarter than you really are or u really think ur use of the words are legit. ; ) you're right. I wrote my post pretty quickly and didn't spend much time proof-reading. When I used the term forcing I let it mean many more things than it actually does. He does react well to drops, he reacts to what he scouts, calling defending "reacting" is foolish. Hmm, I disagree. I think zerg while defending is definitely reacting. Like Day9 says, for the most part you want to pump drones and enough units to defend. In that sense, the opponent is forcing what zerg is going to make and when they're going to make it. You're right, though. In order to do that you need good scouting. | ||
|
Fodder03
Canada142 Posts
| ||
|
Avaclon
United States80 Posts
He relies heavily on units which is extreme mobile, and increase their mobility by well spreading out the creep. By spreading the overlords around, he is extremely vigilant about locations of the enemy and where the enemies are going to strike. When attacking, he would never attack from a single front, always from multiple fronts. He sticks with units that are extreme mobile (zergling, baneling w/speed, roach w/speed, infestors), and reduce enemy's mobility (fungal growth). As Nazza stated above, not only does he flank the opponent from left and right, he introduce the additional element of baneling drops from the sky. To me, he feels more like a general with big picture in mind, where he knows at any given time, straight at head-to-head combat will always result in a loss, that's why he carefully position his opponents and strike when they're at the designate location where he can attack from multiple fronts, winning the battle decisively. | ||
|
haflo
140 Posts
couple of things i would like to add to support the thesis 1) on game 2/3 He FE (game 3 on gold) , which actually manipulated HT to do agressive drops ("OH no he gets an economical lead i need to stop that . push now!") so he knew they are comming and he was ready with crawlers ol and even rouches on the other side (brilliant) . he had exactly the defense he knew he would need . same thing teasing inca with a FE to go 2 gate zelot push and having exactly enough crawlers to stop that. 2) i think mostly against top . early terran effective harras . ("look at that banshi 9 kills , 4 kills on those hellions. top must be in a huge economical advantage! oh wait they are actually even!") he keep macroing up under pressure , he does not over commit to defense . 3) expanding all over the map ,very far distant bases. he knows that his opponent will not use mech army to march around the big map but will opt to use drops . and then he has infestor and queen to clear it up (and not more then that). 4) he can 6 pool you , he will not let you force out bunkering down FE. 5) all his major battles were faught on creep (i got the movement advantage) and NOT at his bases. he caught people on the move , he flanked , he triend and counter hit them at home . he delayed the battle untill he was ready (drops) . then you will fight his game. 6) he tech to multiple direction abling to switch fast ("are we gonna have broodlings ? oh shit 15 ultras!") 7) was always mobile and agressive , drops / mutas but not 20 mutas about 8 , enough to screw up drops and airplay and force opponent to anti air. anyhow thanks for the read OP  | ||
| ||
