|
On November 23 2010 22:24 dakalro wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 22:21 Jermstuddog wrote:
I didn't say no terran is smart enough and I'm not insulting EVERY terran players ability to playlong drawn-out games.
What I'm saying is Terrans have no incentive to pursue long games.
Why spend 40 minutes playing, giving yourself the opportunity to make mistakes when you can just 3 rax marine rush and win 60% of the time?
If anything, top terrans are SMARTER for abusing the broke-ass POS that is the marine to win games before they even start. Kudos to those guys. "Terran has no late-game macro because they have no idea how to play past the marine/marauder all-in push phase." Since the 2 rax push is not guaranteed victory I'm sure someone did try other ways to win games so to say they have no idea is a bit much. Problem is those I've seen try to win a late game (not talking about mid game since that's getting close to balanced, prolly still favoring terran if following a successful harass) have pretty much always failed. I think the point most terrans are trying to make is to not expect to get away with a safe expand without investing at least that much minerals in defense (10+ lings, creep block @ natural so you block the wallin, queen at natural).
I stand by your quote. But its not an insult to the intelligence of top terran players.
I might be a brilliant physicist but I'll never know because I have no incentive to stop what I'm doing now and go to school for 10 years to figure that out.
Why worry about other potential strategies when what you've got now works beautifully. And its hard to argue that marine all-ins don't work beautifully.
And to counter your "at least as much in defense" argument. Shouldn't terran then be building 1 marine per SCV for no other purpose than standing at the front of their base?
Instead we see bases completely defended from counter-attack with a rax, 2 depots and 2 marines while he sends his army off to die.
What's good for 1 isn't good for the other in this argument either.
|
People REALLY need to stop overreacting about mules. What a mule is if he sacrifices most of his scvs is simply 3 scvs at once mining, up constantly if he doesn't scan. If he pulls all his scvs and leaves a mule to mine then its like having 3 scvs up. He pays for the mule for 150 minerals, the OC is simply a surplus package of 3 scvs in this kind of situation, minus the time taken to build the OC. The main advantage of mules is to ability to mine over scvs or save energy and use them at a fresh expansion, neither of them are very relevant here.
Zerg's macro mechanic comes later so they struggle with early game things that advantage of a window when it hasn't kicked it. It takes about 2 game minutes for a drone to pay for itself and to have a replacement unit out, and stuff like 4 warpgate and mass marine happens to hit the window when Z's larvae hasn't paid for themselves so he doesn't have any units/money. Unless he masses lings but thats exploitable.
Im wondering how efficient spine crawlers are though, they worked fine in BW. Perhaps 2 queens is too much to spend early vs 2 rax.
|
Except its more like 4 SCVs that cost 0 supply.
|
On November 23 2010 22:55 Jermstuddog wrote:
Except its more like 4 SCVs that cost 0 supply.
A mule mines exactly as much as 3 scvs afaik, if its 4 is not a big difference, supply cost isn't that relevant its 1/2 a supply depot.
I'll take inject larva or chrono boost over orbital command any day.
|
I think that going pool before hatch might be the solution
|
Not sure about the MULE guys in one day9 it was TvP on LT the toss had 19 probes or 20 the other guy had only 3mules and the incomes were even.
|
On November 23 2010 22:53 Slayer91 wrote:
People REALLY need to stop overreacting about mules. What a mule is if he sacrifices most of his scvs is simply 3 scvs at once mining, up constantly if he doesn't scan. If he pulls all his scvs and leaves a mule to mine then its like having 3 scvs up. He pays for the mule for 150 minerals, the OC is simply a surplus package of 3 scvs in this kind of situation, minus the time taken to build the OC. The main advantage of mules is to ability to mine over scvs or save energy and use them at a fresh expansion, neither of them are very relevant here.
without the mule terrans who fail their allin but kill the hatchery would not be able to finish the game.
Thats why zerg complains about mule. It allows for insane combacks that should not realistically happen. Like the age old dimaga game where he goes allin and kills every scv the terran has, yet the terran manages to stage an insane comeback using 2 orbital commands but it also allows for the sickest of allinns where pulling workers is not as detrimental to their economy as the other races would have liked.
To say that the mule isnt relevant is like saying marines are not relevant, you need to see the full circle to understand terran strategy.
|
On November 23 2010 23:02 Madkipz wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 22:53 Slayer91 wrote:
People REALLY need to stop overreacting about mules. What a mule is if he sacrifices most of his scvs is simply 3 scvs at once mining, up constantly if he doesn't scan. If he pulls all his scvs and leaves a mule to mine then its like having 3 scvs up. He pays for the mule for 150 minerals, the OC is simply a surplus package of 3 scvs in this kind of situation, minus the time taken to build the OC. The main advantage of mules is to ability to mine over scvs or save energy and use them at a fresh expansion, neither of them are very relevant here. without the mule terrans who fail their allin but kill the hatchery would not be able to finish the game. Thats why zerg complains about mule. It allows for insane combacks that should not realistically happen. Like the age old dimaga game where he goes allin and kills every scv the terran has, yet the terran manages to stage an insane comeback using 2 orbital commands but it also allows for the sickest of allinns where pulling workers is not as detrimental to their economy as the other races would have liked. To say that the mule isnt relevant is like saying marines are not relevant, you need to see the full circle to understand terran strategy.
That's because there were mules which were kept alive, he was probably saving energy from 2 OC's when he was running in with the lings. You could say well OK mules saved him there, but that wasa gimmicky situation where the ability to save mules saved him. 2 base terran vs 1 base zerg, he only needed a few mules to come back considering insane larvae spent by dimaga not on drones but on lings.
But really, if you count mules are part of the terran economy, and always add 3 scvs per orbital command when looking at terran harvester count you'll find its quite reasonable.
Pulling workers is just as detrimental as in sc1, except you have to count the mule as 3 scvs.
Sure, mules are nice, but they're not as good a "macro mechanic" for "macro games" since they don't scale as fast as chrono boost or inject larvae, I would say it's really helpful for these types of allins, but chrono boost x3 gives roughly the same advantage in terms of harvesters, I would say mules are best for some kind of 1 or 2 base allin where mule mining overmins is very useful for some kind of barracks scv allin later on.
|
All I know is, all these rushes are ruining my ZvT. I expect it almost every time I 14 hatch, and if I don't 14 hatch I get bunker blocked in my base. I can't seem to feel safe opening anymore and I focus on the wrong things...banshees always surprise me now when they never used to, tank pushes nearly always kill me when I would easily counter with roaches before...but basically, I'm not gonna sit and complain like most zergs...what I'm asking is how can I adjust to this new shift in the metagame while still staying ahead economically against a good aggressive terran? I know it comes down to maps and positions etc but I just don't want to feel as pressured as I am now. ZvT went from my best matchup to my most feared. :x
|
On November 23 2010 22:53 Jermstuddog wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 22:24 dakalro wrote:On November 23 2010 22:21 Jermstuddog wrote:
I didn't say no terran is smart enough and I'm not insulting EVERY terran players ability to playlong drawn-out games.
What I'm saying is Terrans have no incentive to pursue long games.
Why spend 40 minutes playing, giving yourself the opportunity to make mistakes when you can just 3 rax marine rush and win 60% of the time?
If anything, top terrans are SMARTER for abusing the broke-ass POS that is the marine to win games before they even start. Kudos to those guys. "Terran has no late-game macro because they have no idea how to play past the marine/marauder all-in push phase." Since the 2 rax push is not guaranteed victory I'm sure someone did try other ways to win games so to say they have no idea is a bit much. Problem is those I've seen try to win a late game (not talking about mid game since that's getting close to balanced, prolly still favoring terran if following a successful harass) have pretty much always failed. I think the point most terrans are trying to make is to not expect to get away with a safe expand without investing at least that much minerals in defense (10+ lings, creep block @ natural so you block the wallin, queen at natural). I stand by your quote. But its not an insult to the intelligence of top terran players. I might be a brilliant physicist but I'll never know because I have no incentive to stop what I'm doing now and go to school for 10 years to figure that out. Why worry about other potential strategies when what you've got now works beautifully. And its hard to argue that marine all-ins don't work beautifully. And to counter your "at least as much in defense" argument. Shouldn't terran then be building 1 marine per SCV for no other purpose than standing at the front of their base? Instead we see bases completely defended from counter-attack with a rax, 2 depots and 2 marines while he sends his army off to die. What's good for 1 isn't good for the other in this argument either.
I apologize for the misunderstanding. The point I was trying to make is that you need army in decent numbers if you expect to be safe in your base.
The terran is defending with a wallin but he already invested in the marines that are attacking and the wallin - even if all the buildings are refundable/have a use, maybe except the supply which most would consider expendable vs banes - (some quote about the best defense is a good offense comes to mind).
You expand therefore refuse to attack as a safety mechanism but that doesn't mean the game should allow you to get out of making army for another few minutes, it just doesn't work that way. I see it as always have enough defensive capability to defend all you want to save against anything you have scouted or that might be thrown your way, anything less and it's a risk you're taking to lose.
Overall, from the zerg opinions I take it that it is not impossible to defend, far from it, it would actually be easy to do if willing to sacrifice economy. It is just not good for the zerg economy/development unlike reaper rushes that were quite difficult to defend against.
|
i think its the usual teran imba tbh they need to nerf marines and change the Barracks requirements as well so they cant be build until zerg has at least 2 hatchs fully saturated
whos for another game of zergcraft ?
only joking im just bitter cause i have such a hard time dealing with zerg
|
On November 23 2010 23:09 Slayer91 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 23:02 Madkipz wrote:On November 23 2010 22:53 Slayer91 wrote:
People REALLY need to stop overreacting about mules. What a mule is if he sacrifices most of his scvs is simply 3 scvs at once mining, up constantly if he doesn't scan. If he pulls all his scvs and leaves a mule to mine then its like having 3 scvs up. He pays for the mule for 150 minerals, the OC is simply a surplus package of 3 scvs in this kind of situation, minus the time taken to build the OC. The main advantage of mules is to ability to mine over scvs or save energy and use them at a fresh expansion, neither of them are very relevant here. without the mule terrans who fail their allin but kill the hatchery would not be able to finish the game. Thats why zerg complains about mule. It allows for insane combacks that should not realistically happen. Like the age old dimaga game where he goes allin and kills every scv the terran has, yet the terran manages to stage an insane comeback using 2 orbital commands but it also allows for the sickest of allinns where pulling workers is not as detrimental to their economy as the other races would have liked. To say that the mule isnt relevant is like saying marines are not relevant, you need to see the full circle to understand terran strategy. That's because there were mules which were kept alive, he was probably saving energy from 2 OC's when he was running in with the lings. You could say well OK mules saved him there, but that wasa gimmicky situation where the ability to save mules saved him. 2 base terran vs 1 base zerg, he only needed a few mules to come back considering insane larvae spent by dimaga not on drones but on lings. But really, if you count mules are part of the terran economy, and always add 3 scvs per orbital command when looking at terran harvester count you'll find its quite reasonable. Pulling workers is just as detrimental as in sc1, except you have to count the mule as 3 scvs. Sure, mules are nice, but they're not as good a "macro mechanic" for "macro games" since they don't scale as fast as chrono boost or inject larvae, I would say it's really helpful for these types of allins, but chrono boost x3 gives roughly the same advantage in terms of harvesters, I would say mules are best for some kind of 1 or 2 base allin where mule mining overmins is very useful for some kind of barracks scv allin later on.
no it is not, mules are seperate from scv/probe/drone saturation. 14 scvs + mule is equal to or better than 24 workers with no mule. This is why you see every game TvZ/P that the terran has about 220 more minerals gained than the opponent at the income tab if he is consistent with mules and scv production.
Its part of why zergs want to 14 hatch. They do so because they cant match a terrans economy on equal bases.
|
it should be pretty well understood that any hatch-before-pool is a risky BO. with that type of build, you should be getting your first queen as soon as the pool finishes, and have another building immediately after your first round of 25 energy should be spent on a tumor so that by the time your nat finishes, the creep should just about be there.
scouting this type of early aggression isn't really that much of a problem. if you keep a drone or a ling at the base of his ramp then you know when he's rolling out. if you don't have the larva to push out enough lings to defend with the queens, then just throw down a spine or two (i usually build a blind one anyway, and depending on when he pushes it will either have been moved to right next to my nat, or sitting at the top of my ramp)
if he's pulling scvs, and you don't think you can hold the push, you need to be pulling drones. there's no way he can beat you if you have more drones than he does scvs, 2 queens, a spine crawler and x amount of lings. just dance your queens around and block with the melee units
again, 14 hatch is a risky BO, and if your opponent doesn't either punish it or do some sort of 1/2rax FE, then you basically win. With that in mind, don't powerdrone to the point where you are exposed.
going pool first into a 20hatch doesn't leave you that far behind economically, because with a 14hatch you aren't able to saturate your main before hatch #2 is up anyway....so just drone on 1 base while actively scouting to make sure you can see the push. walk a spine up to your ramp and take your expo at 20. you should have one of your queens there before (or just as) it finishes to spit on it right away. move 4-6 drones over and play from there.
i don't see how you would need banelings to defend this push as long as you fight on creep and don't overextend yourself. assuming he does pull SCVs, even if he drops one or both of your queens (which shouldnt be happening) then you're still ahead.
|
On November 23 2010 16:43 Wasteweiser wrote:
Cheese? Sure call it what you will but winning is winning and greedy playstyles should get punished.
i have to agree with this, i'm a zerg player & terran should have an option to stop fast hatch, i found scouting for gas with overlord or early drone is key to scout for this, if you still hatch first u will need to pull all your drones & get a few spines to stop it, but if u do your so far ahead it's not funny
|
Well to cast aside all your "he is just trying to get a better econ than me" argument, I would say I'm the perfect guy for that.
I currently open 7-pool in every ZvZ and ZvP game I play because I am an uber-aggressive player.
I have tried 7-pool, 12-pool, bling busts, 5RR, none of those have stable out-comes because wall-ins with marines/marauders/hellions behind them are so easily defended. I will always be behind if I go for early aggression and don't win out-right. Simple fact of the match.
So then I revert to 14 hatch. GSL2 scared me away from that, so I did some testing and found that 13 pool 15 hatch costs 50 minerals and is much safer. Then I played against a retard who went for a blind bunker wall-in anyway and came to realize that 13 pool is no better about getting that expo up safely.
Don't even try to argue about in-base hatching. Its been tried and its been proven to be terrible. You are punishing yourself for no reason when you in-base hatch.
So the sad fact of ZvT is, you HAVE to get that hatch up at your expo before 20 supply or you are in such an economic handicap you will never be able match a terran as he gets his expo up and you proceed to mid-game.
Its not "economic cheese". 1 base Terran has equal economy to a FE Zerg for the first 10 minutes of the game.
TvZ has become beating up the fat kid before he can get into shape and fight back.
|
On November 23 2010 23:35 Madkipz wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 23:09 Slayer91 wrote:On November 23 2010 23:02 Madkipz wrote:On November 23 2010 22:53 Slayer91 wrote:
People REALLY need to stop overreacting about mules. What a mule is if he sacrifices most of his scvs is simply 3 scvs at once mining, up constantly if he doesn't scan. If he pulls all his scvs and leaves a mule to mine then its like having 3 scvs up. He pays for the mule for 150 minerals, the OC is simply a surplus package of 3 scvs in this kind of situation, minus the time taken to build the OC. The main advantage of mules is to ability to mine over scvs or save energy and use them at a fresh expansion, neither of them are very relevant here. without the mule terrans who fail their allin but kill the hatchery would not be able to finish the game. Thats why zerg complains about mule. It allows for insane combacks that should not realistically happen. Like the age old dimaga game where he goes allin and kills every scv the terran has, yet the terran manages to stage an insane comeback using 2 orbital commands but it also allows for the sickest of allinns where pulling workers is not as detrimental to their economy as the other races would have liked. To say that the mule isnt relevant is like saying marines are not relevant, you need to see the full circle to understand terran strategy. That's because there were mules which were kept alive, he was probably saving energy from 2 OC's when he was running in with the lings. You could say well OK mules saved him there, but that wasa gimmicky situation where the ability to save mules saved him. 2 base terran vs 1 base zerg, he only needed a few mules to come back considering insane larvae spent by dimaga not on drones but on lings. But really, if you count mules are part of the terran economy, and always add 3 scvs per orbital command when looking at terran harvester count you'll find its quite reasonable. Pulling workers is just as detrimental as in sc1, except you have to count the mule as 3 scvs. Sure, mules are nice, but they're not as good a "macro mechanic" for "macro games" since they don't scale as fast as chrono boost or inject larvae, I would say it's really helpful for these types of allins, but chrono boost x3 gives roughly the same advantage in terms of harvesters, I would say mules are best for some kind of 1 or 2 base allin where mule mining overmins is very useful for some kind of barracks scv allin later on. no it is not, mules are seperate from scv/probe/drone saturation. 14 scvs + mule is equal to or better than 24 workers with no mule. This is why you see every game TvZ/P that the terran has about 220 more minerals gained than the opponent at the income tab if he is consistent with mules and scv production. Its part of why zergs want to 14 hatch. They do so because they cant match a terrans economy on equal bases.
I said that. It only applies however, IF you're saturated. That means if both races fast expand, mules only count for about 3 scvs until he's saturated, but it means when he is saturated, 2 base terran can keep up with 3 base if the third base isn't totally saturated.
In any case, this isn't relevant, you're just making an argument for mules imba, when it doesn't apply to this situation, it applies to normal tvz in which case terrans seem to be struggling.
|
United States7481 Posts
While I do agree that it's monotonous and boring, I suggest that we give some time for Zerg to experiment with pool 1st builds before doing any rash nerfs. Similar to how I'm not advocating a nerf to zerg lategame at this point even though they typically dominate at that point in the game because we are giving time for Terran to experiment around with late-game ideas. I think getting out of the mindset of "must hatch before 18" could be helpful for zerg.
|
On November 23 2010 23:39 Antoine wrote:
While I do agree that it's monotonous and boring, I suggest that we give some time for Zerg to experiment with pool 1st builds before doing any rash nerfs. Similar to how I'm not advocating a nerf to zerg lategame at this point even though they typically dominate at that point in the game because we are giving time for Terran to experiment around with late-game ideas. I think getting out of the mindset of "must hatch before 18" could be helpful for zerg.
You DO realize there's no way to match a Terrans income let-alone get ahead on one base right?
Couple that with the fact that their units are always better economically and you have yourself a failing formula.
I was all about 1-base zerg back in beta, but the income difference is too great.
|
On November 23 2010 23:39 Slayer91 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 23:35 Madkipz wrote:On November 23 2010 23:09 Slayer91 wrote:On November 23 2010 23:02 Madkipz wrote:On November 23 2010 22:53 Slayer91 wrote:
People REALLY need to stop overreacting about mules. What a mule is if he sacrifices most of his scvs is simply 3 scvs at once mining, up constantly if he doesn't scan. If he pulls all his scvs and leaves a mule to mine then its like having 3 scvs up. He pays for the mule for 150 minerals, the OC is simply a surplus package of 3 scvs in this kind of situation, minus the time taken to build the OC. The main advantage of mules is to ability to mine over scvs or save energy and use them at a fresh expansion, neither of them are very relevant here. without the mule terrans who fail their allin but kill the hatchery would not be able to finish the game. Thats why zerg complains about mule. It allows for insane combacks that should not realistically happen. Like the age old dimaga game where he goes allin and kills every scv the terran has, yet the terran manages to stage an insane comeback using 2 orbital commands but it also allows for the sickest of allinns where pulling workers is not as detrimental to their economy as the other races would have liked. To say that the mule isnt relevant is like saying marines are not relevant, you need to see the full circle to understand terran strategy. That's because there were mules which were kept alive, he was probably saving energy from 2 OC's when he was running in with the lings. You could say well OK mules saved him there, but that wasa gimmicky situation where the ability to save mules saved him. 2 base terran vs 1 base zerg, he only needed a few mules to come back considering insane larvae spent by dimaga not on drones but on lings. But really, if you count mules are part of the terran economy, and always add 3 scvs per orbital command when looking at terran harvester count you'll find its quite reasonable. Pulling workers is just as detrimental as in sc1, except you have to count the mule as 3 scvs. Sure, mules are nice, but they're not as good a "macro mechanic" for "macro games" since they don't scale as fast as chrono boost or inject larvae, I would say it's really helpful for these types of allins, but chrono boost x3 gives roughly the same advantage in terms of harvesters, I would say mules are best for some kind of 1 or 2 base allin where mule mining overmins is very useful for some kind of barracks scv allin later on. no it is not, mules are seperate from scv/probe/drone saturation. 14 scvs + mule is equal to or better than 24 workers with no mule. This is why you see every game TvZ/P that the terran has about 220 more minerals gained than the opponent at the income tab if he is consistent with mules and scv production. Its part of why zergs want to 14 hatch. They do so because they cant match a terrans economy on equal bases. I said that. It only applies however, IF you're saturated. That means if both races fast expand, mules only count for about 3 scvs until he's saturated, but it means when he is saturated, 2 base terran can keep up with 3 base if the third base isn't totally saturated. In any case, this isn't relevant, you're just making an argument for mules imba, when it doesn't apply to this situation, it applies to normal tvz in which case terrans seem to be struggling.
Except im the one quoting you stating that mules are not relevant when they 12,14 rax. They are the sole reason this sort of agressive allinn works so well. Not saying its bad, simply saying that you shouldnt rack on the people who hate on the mule because it is very relevant.
The mule is good when both players have low saturation and the mule is also good when both players have high econ.
|
Imho so far the reasons it is such a big deal for now are:
1) it is Newish, people dont know how to deal with it.
2) Artosis is crying about like a little girl.
So far what i have seen is about 50% win rate with this, and wins with this was against pretty bad zerg in GSL so.. ya it CAN hurt, but if it doesnt you lost, there is no transition out of it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
