|
This season's GSL has been very telling of a new VERY strong trend in TvZ. Anyone keeping up in the GSL knows what I'm talking about.
Punishing the 14 Hatch with the 2Rax + Pull SCVs once the OC is done seems very strong. Now, the amount of all-in aggression is semi-risky in that there is absolutely no recovery out of it. However, in my opinion, it seems much stronger than traditional cheese tactics (proxy 2gate/cannon rush/proxy rax) in that the very fact that the option for this cheese exists not only cancels out a possible builder order (14 hatch/14 pool) but also makes the Zerg almost HAVE to get a blind bling nest or mass lings. This is due to the inability to scout a walled in Terran without sacrificing and overlord.
My final thoughts? It is cheese. It is very strong cheese. It makes me worried for possible Zerg openers because cutting off hatchery first puts down a very limited amount of very scoutable openings for Z.
I don't think this becomes an issue of ZOMG NERF TERRAN but rather how can Zerg adapt to handle this opening. The only times I've seen it beat were with a blind baneling nest or blindly pumping a bunch of lings when something feels fishy.
|
Need faster banelings is all, not too many just a few to be safe.
That or maybe more crawlers.
|
Pull more drones, or try to open with an earlier pool
But considering you are saying this is the new "ZvT" then sir you are VERY mistaken if you count this as cheese.
|
On November 23 2010 16:21 n0xi3 wrote:
Pull more drones, or try to open with an earlier pool
But considering you are saying this is the new "ZvT" then sir you are VERY mistaken if you count this as cheese.
I didn't say its the new ZvT. I said it's a trend. And it's not cheese in its traditional sense I suppose. It is a reaction to seeing a 14 hatch. But its hard to call something that requires pulling all your SCVs within the first 5 minutes of a game anything but cheese.
|
I've been using this 2 rax play against Zerg on the NA servers for about a month now and it's incredibly effective. Though I don't bring near all my SCVs to try and finish it then and there; merely use it as early aggression. I actually forsee a lot of zerg going normal pool plus speed with a 20 hatch if they don't figure out how to counter it with going 14 hatch. The 14 hatch build has always been an economic gamble and now that Terran have figured out the trick to beating it, the 20 hatch will become the new safe zerg econ build.
|
I somewhat enjoy it, still pretty exciting for me seeing the players go in such a micro intensive battles.
The problem may be that Zerg on two bases is strong as hell, especially after saturation. No matter how good you are, you do not want to go into a macro game with Zerg, too risky. However I believe that this will be the bane of T in GSL 3, Zerg's will know how to crack this thing by the Ro 16 with little to no problem.
|
It's a terrible trend. It is very difficult for zerg to know how many rax a terran is building. Slow overlords can see enough some times, but on certain maps it is unlikely. Blistering sands for example is almost impossible to scout with slow overlords.
This means that zerg is pretty much 50/50 on what they decide to do when they see terran opening with 2 rax. Do they throw down a baneling nest and pump speedling/baneling/roach in preperation for scv/marine timing attack? If so you certainly may win the game. However, if terran scouts and sees this or just decides to do bluff aggression the zerg is left with an economy in shambles.
Opening 2 rax means zerg needs to cut drones immediately. Terran can expand, build more rax, all in with 2 rax, or tech to whatever. It is all viable if zerg can't scout it and respond properly. Which is another problem with the matchup, if zergs do manage to find out what a terran is doing I feel they can usually stop it pretty easily. It's a fucking mess.
|
This deffinately makes ZvT more intense, I play random and I always try to execute this as Terran vs Zerg, however I counter it very easy as Zerg.. dunno guess I am just lucky
|
TBH I don't it's all that strong of an opener at this point zergs know it and they know how to counter it. If they get even the slightest tip off that the terran are doing it they can prepare easily for it. Granted some maps this type of build is very strong, but isn't that how it's always been with cheese builds?
I don't see anything ground breaking in this type of terran opener. If anything I think most terrans feel compelled to do this so they don't lose a macro game.
|
This reminds me of PvT where you guess wrong you lose.
As Protoss of course, seeing how Terran seems to have a free ticket to midgame, every game.
|
it is up to the Zerg to be able to consistently defend it, which I definitely think is possible. this will probably be what separates the good zergs from the bad ones heh.
|
Blizz can't even patch it; the metagame is moving waaaaayyyy too fast.
|
i don't think it's cheese because it can lead to a decent transition, at worst it puts some presure and forces some money spent on stuff they don't need, at best it wins the game.
|
this was done back in GSL Season 2 Finals not exactly "recent"
|
Cheese? Sure call it what you will but winning is winning and greedy playstyles should get punished.
|
On November 23 2010 16:33 Bosu wrote:
It's a terrible trend. It is very difficult for zerg to know how many rax a terran is building. Slow overlords can see enough some times, but on certain maps it is unlikely. Blistering sands for example is almost impossible to scout with slow overlords.
This means that zerg is pretty much 50/50 on what they decide to do when they see terran opening with 2 rax. Do they throw down a baneling nest and pump speedling/baneling/roach in preperation for scv/marine timing attack? If so you certainly may win the game. However, if terran scouts and sees this or just decides to do bluff aggression the zerg is left with an economy in shambles.
Opening 2 rax means zerg needs to cut drones immediately. Terran can expand, build more rax, all in with 2 rax, or tech to whatever. It is all viable if zerg can't scout it and respond properly. Which is another problem with the matchup, if zergs do manage to find out what a terran is doing I feel they can usually stop it pretty easily. It's a fucking mess.
al they have to do is not 14 hatch?
|
On November 23 2010 16:41 Kraz.Del wrote:
Blizz can't even patch it; the metagame is moving waaaaayyyy too fast.
Why patch it?
I'm sure Protoss have a far less winrate against the 2 thor rush or the countless variations of the Marine/Banshee/Raven timing push. Those have been around for a while and nothings been done about that. If it's possible to defend without seriously compromising anything after that, it is fine, in blizzards eyes. For example reapers were nerfed because vs Z, Zerg had a hard time defending, yep, but also came out 'behind' after the harass.
|
Of course everyone does the strategy and tactics shown in the gsl finals.
It's quite self explainatory.
I think 14 hatch is kind of nessesary for zerg, it's too bad that so much relies on it, it should be quite standard imo.. We already have to all in or wish for a opponent mistake on like 40% of the maps  Really, I like the maps on every aspect except balance but it's really redicilous now, why aren't the maps big like in sc1? Would fix alot of stuff...
|
Last time i have played against this as a Z i had 3 sunkens at my natural (which ofc aswell covered the choke), when i saw the T marching in, i just A-Moved to the ramp, stopped the drones after the ramp had been blocked, and when the rines / SCV´s didnt automatically fire the drones i a-moved again.
With a blocked choke and setting the sunkens to attack the marines it was no great deal after all, but i felt he came a little early (too few marines) anyways.
I play random, and thus i often ask myself if i get stuck in the same situation as a terran player: how many marines are the perfect number to push out? You obv. dont want the 2nd hatch to saturate, but to be able to kill off some lings / sunkens and the drones you need at least 6 rines in my opinion. Is 6 marines a viable number to call it a go in this situation?
Last comment on this being the new TvZ: Its a gamble on both sides. If you scout it as a Z, you can just pull out 2-3 sunkens and some lings and be fine, if it is not scoutet you´re in a terrible, terrible position...
|
It's great because fast expanding should always involve an element of risk - Zerg or any other race. And it makes for more intense games.
|
On November 23 2010 16:21 n0xi3 wrote:
Pull more drones, or try to open with an earlier pool
But considering you are saying this is the new "ZvT" then sir you are VERY mistaken if you count this as cheese.
I consider pulling all your scv's as a cheese considering its all-in. It's not neccessarily the new 'ZvT" its just a reaction to a 14 hatch.
SCV- Well...lets see whats going on in the zerg's base
SCV- Hatch before pool! omg i gotta go tell my friends
SCV- Hey guys lets mine for a bit and then follow about 20 of our marine friends and throw ourselves at zerglings like human shields
Marines- Pew, pew
Zerg Hatchery- Ouch, GG
On a serious note, i feel like this could seriously hurt the direction ZvT is heading. The only way i can see things developing from this is you can't hatch before pool on 1v1 maps or closed positions its just to risky in the aspect of your going to encounter this 2 rax play. Also as artosis said a proper response might have to be if you go hatch first you have to go blind baneling nest WHICH isn't the worst thing in the world. Zerg players will adapt... but a lot of the all-in strats are because it was the RO64 we will see how players start playing once RO32 starts
|
SCVS OP!!!
In all seriousness, what damage is there in going for an early Baneling Nest? Does the 150/50 investment not do enough to be safe? I don't play Zerg, so I'm not sure about the timings. Are the resulting Banelings an insufficient countermeasure, or does the investment screw you over in regards to some other intense timing push? Couldn't you simply leave a single Zergling outside their front and morph 5 lings into Banelings back home along with making a few more sets? Would that simply not produce enough units to defend with? I'm personally not seeing a huge difference between this and being forced to go for a Robo Fac in PvT to defend against potential Banshees. I could very well be wrong, though. Is the response more intense than just building a Bane Nest and building an army once their push leaves their base?
|
I think the next step will be 15 hatch inside the base. Popping some lings/blings, expand after that and saturate it instantly.
|
i think what you are seeing is not a nice new strategie its more like:
this is the only way i can win this matchup so lets try it.
it dont show a great new terran build. it shows the terran weakness and a possiblitiy to deny the early advantage of 14 hatch with an allin...
|
I think the next step will be 15 hatch inside the base. Popping some lings/blings, expand after that and saturate it instantly.
That's the way i'm thinking about my Zerg play at the moment. I did'nt have time to try it yet though.
|
14 hatch is nonsense and I'm glad terrans found ways to punish it. For a while all zergs were doing is 14 hatch, being completely safe, make like 2 zerglings a million drones. Hatch zlings and banelings when terran pushes out, because they have to push or they will lose, as it is their responsibility to be the aggressor since their late game sucks. And then BAM, wipe your entire army if u make 1 micro mistake. Once that first armies gone its game over. Now that was lame.
Now zergs have to maybe make a spawning pool first occasionally, and when they make that spawning pool they need to produce units for defense. Sounds good 2 me.
|
Spoiler if u didn't watch HayPro's game
Honestly it is pretty ridiculous... that guy absolutely annihilated HayPro. It's not that he even couldn't tell it was coming since like every single Terran did it before his game as well... it's just insanely strong when one of the absolute top Zerg's gets beaten so bad.
|
On November 23 2010 16:56 Acritter wrote:
SCVS OP!!!
In all seriousness, what damage is there in going for an early Baneling Nest? Does the 150/50 investment not do enough to be safe? I don't play Zerg, so I'm not sure about the timings. Are the resulting Banelings an insufficient countermeasure, or does the investment screw you over in regards to some other intense timing push? Couldn't you simply leave a single Zergling outside their front and morph 5 lings into Banelings back home along with making a few more sets? Would that simply not produce enough units to defend with? I'm personally not seeing a huge difference between this and being forced to go for a Robo Fac in PvT to defend against potential Banshees. I could very well be wrong, though. Is the response more intense than just building a Bane Nest and building an army once their push leaves their base? Throwing down the banelings nest blindly is really detrimental. I mean, in most cases against T, it is necessary eventually but think about it this way. That 150/50 could pretty much be your Lair. And your Lair is your key to tech. It's like telling a Protoss player to blindly open 2gate EVERY time instead of 1gate into cybercore. It severely halts your tech path as well as forces you into using your early aggression to try to justify it being there.
|
On November 23 2010 17:25 Epoch wrote:
14 hatch is nonsense and I'm glad terrans found ways to punish it. For a while all zergs were doing is 14 hatch, being completely safe, make like 2 zerglings a million drones. Hatch zlings and banelings when terran pushes out, because they have to push or they will lose, as it is their responsibility to be the aggressor since their late game sucks. And then BAM, wipe your entire army if u make 1 micro mistake. Once that first armies gone its game over. Now that was lame.
Now zergs have to maybe make a spawning pool first occasionally, and when they make that spawning pool they need to produce units for defense. Sounds good 2 me.
Agreed. 14 Hatch is so greedy. I mean the correct response to seeing a 2nd DEFENSELESS base of any race should be: "lets go ******* kill it". I mean if you can't counter a FE with basically an all-in timing push/rush than that's ridiculous. There has to be a downside/risk to FE. Zerg should have to make some fighting units before an expansion just like everyone else.
I know the races are different, but as protoss if I were to Nexus before gateway or forge I'd get rolfstomped everytime. If I see a terran CC go down at 15 I immediately send my first few units to force it to at least lift off.
|
Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 16:15 Durn wrote:
This season's GSL has been very telling of a new VERY strong trend in TvZ. Anyone keeping up in the GSL knows what I'm talking about.
Punishing the 14 Hatch with the 2Rax + Pull SCVs once the OC is done seems very strong. Now, the amount of all-in aggression is semi-risky in that there is absolutely no recovery out of it. However, in my opinion, it seems much stronger than traditional cheese tactics (proxy 2gate/cannon rush/proxy rax) in that the very fact that the option for this cheese exists not only cancels out a possible builder order (14 hatch/14 pool) but also makes the Zerg almost HAVE to get a blind bling nest or mass lings. This is due to the inability to scout a walled in Terran without sacrificing and overlord.
My final thoughts? It is cheese. It is very strong cheese. It makes me worried for possible Zerg openers because cutting off hatchery first puts down a very limited amount of very scoutable openings for Z.
I don't think this becomes an issue of ZOMG NERF TERRAN but rather how can Zerg adapt to handle this opening. The only times I've seen it beat were with a blind baneling nest or blindly pumping a bunch of lings when something feels fishy.
Only watch Nestea vs Foxer finals and learn how nestea deals with it
|
On November 23 2010 17:36 busdriver wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 17:25 Epoch wrote:
14 hatch is nonsense and I'm glad terrans found ways to punish it. For a while all zergs were doing is 14 hatch, being completely safe, make like 2 zerglings a million drones. Hatch zlings and banelings when terran pushes out, because they have to push or they will lose, as it is their responsibility to be the aggressor since their late game sucks. And then BAM, wipe your entire army if u make 1 micro mistake. Once that first armies gone its game over. Now that was lame.
Now zergs have to maybe make a spawning pool first occasionally, and when they make that spawning pool they need to produce units for defense. Sounds good 2 me. Agreed. 14 Hatch is so greedy. I mean the correct response to seeing a 2nd DEFENSELESS base of any race should be: "lets go ******* kill it". I mean if you can't counter a FE with basically an all-in timing push/rush than that's ridiculous. There has to be a downside/risk to FE. Zerg should have to make some fighting units before an expansion just like everyone else. I know the races are different, but as protoss if I were to Nexus before gateway or forge I'd get rolfstomped everytime. If I see a terran CC go down at 15 I immediately send my first few units to force it to at least lift off.
I don't know if I necessarily agree with that mentality. When you see a very early undefended second base, you have 2 options as far as I see. You can push into it, or you can take your second as well. It's not like theyr'e suddenly going have an army to counter yours and most races can expand later than Zerg and be fine. And really, I'd favor my chances as a 2 base Terran versus a 2 base Zerg than trying to crush his FE with a shotty timing attack. It just relies on your macro being better than the Zerg players and finding a strong timing to hit the Zerg with.
|
On November 23 2010 17:36 Durn wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 16:56 Acritter wrote:
SCVS OP!!!
In all seriousness, what damage is there in going for an early Baneling Nest? Does the 150/50 investment not do enough to be safe? I don't play Zerg, so I'm not sure about the timings. Are the resulting Banelings an insufficient countermeasure, or does the investment screw you over in regards to some other intense timing push? Couldn't you simply leave a single Zergling outside their front and morph 5 lings into Banelings back home along with making a few more sets? Would that simply not produce enough units to defend with? I'm personally not seeing a huge difference between this and being forced to go for a Robo Fac in PvT to defend against potential Banshees. I could very well be wrong, though. Is the response more intense than just building a Bane Nest and building an army once their push leaves their base? Throwing down the banelings nest blindly is really detrimental. I mean, in most cases against T, it is necessary eventually but think about it this way. That 150/50 could pretty much be your Lair. And your Lair is your key to tech. It's like telling a Protoss player to blindly open 2gate EVERY time instead of 1gate into cybercore. It severely halts your tech path as well as forces you into using your early aggression to try to justify it being there.
You mean like protoss are forced to get a blind robo + observer (200/100 + 50/100) every game against terran. Which could be a TC or stargate + upgrade or phoenix/VR. Kinda sucks to have a BO forced on you huh? Terran are really the only race that gets to just sit behind its wall and make whatever opening it wants. So frustrating.
|
its not even an anti-fast expand build, its nearly as good vs pool first
they can have 7-9 marines at your choke before speed finishes even if you 14 gas 14 pool, means you have to make constant lings off of pool first to just barely defend the rush, and the thing is if they scout you making pure lings they just put down a command center and are way ahead. even if you completely stop the rush you have a bunch of useless zerglings and they have more workers than you, and you have a late hatch.
its a build that can punish anything thats not purely defensive, but it sacrifices like 1 scv of economy.
|
I don't see why zergs are having a problem with this. 14 hatchpool then 15 olgas 6 lings as pool pops have 1 dronepatrol a double bunker wallin and depending when he hits some ppl wait for a ton of marines you just get a spinecrawler and save your energy for transfuse to by time for speed to finish. maybe it's because i'm a micro oriented played, but i find this foxer style play a free win
|
On November 23 2010 17:42 peachsncream wrote:
I don't see why zergs are having a problem with this. 14 hatchpool then 15 olgas 6 lings as pool pops have 1 dronepatrol a double bunker wallin and depending when he hits some ppl wait for a ton of marines you just get a spinecrawler and save your energy for transfuse to by time for speed to finish. maybe it's because i'm a micro oriented played, but i find this foxer style play a free win
The problem is your counter is countered harder by the terran simply not attacking. Or feigning an attack forcing zerg to make more lings/banelings when they should be making drones. Or attacking at an odd time like haypros game on scrap station.
|
I'm a toss player, but I really dont understand the QQ that zergs are doing.
Late game Terran vs Zerg (or even Toss vs Zerg for that matter) is insane. It doesnt matter what the terran does. Zerg will throw away their cheap armies for an even trade in terms of cost, and then rebuild their scary endgame force and proceed to mop-up the remaining terran forces. And Artosis and Tasteless will proceed to swing by the zerg's nuts and say "WOW WHAT INSANE MACRO PLAY", when every 2000+ zergs do this shit easily once they reach endgame safely. The onus is on Terran and Toss to NOT allow zergs to reach that point in an even fashion, otherwise they will just get rolled over.
If zerg wants to be safe with early game expansions, they need to take late game nerfs. Otherwise they will continue winning tournaments left and right and only fools will believe this nonsense that "All zerg players are 10x more skilled than other races".
|
It's either that or a standard build that loses 90% of the time.
|
On November 23 2010 17:41 Durn wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 17:36 busdriver wrote:On November 23 2010 17:25 Epoch wrote:
14 hatch is nonsense and I'm glad terrans found ways to punish it. For a while all zergs were doing is 14 hatch, being completely safe, make like 2 zerglings a million drones. Hatch zlings and banelings when terran pushes out, because they have to push or they will lose, as it is their responsibility to be the aggressor since their late game sucks. And then BAM, wipe your entire army if u make 1 micro mistake. Once that first armies gone its game over. Now that was lame.
Now zergs have to maybe make a spawning pool first occasionally, and when they make that spawning pool they need to produce units for defense. Sounds good 2 me. Agreed. 14 Hatch is so greedy. I mean the correct response to seeing a 2nd DEFENSELESS base of any race should be: "lets go ******* kill it". I mean if you can't counter a FE with basically an all-in timing push/rush than that's ridiculous. There has to be a downside/risk to FE. Zerg should have to make some fighting units before an expansion just like everyone else. I know the races are different, but as protoss if I were to Nexus before gateway or forge I'd get rolfstomped everytime. If I see a terran CC go down at 15 I immediately send my first few units to force it to at least lift off. I don't know if I necessarily agree with that mentality. When you see a very early undefended second base, you have 2 options as far as I see. You can push into it, or you can take your second as well. It's not like theyr'e suddenly going have an army to counter yours and most races can expand later than Zerg and be fine. And really, I'd favor my chances as a 2 base Terran versus a 2 base Zerg than trying to crush his FE with a shotty timing attack. It just relies on your macro being better than the Zerg players and finding a strong timing to hit the Zerg with.
My general strategy (I play protoss) is to do the opposite of the other player. He wants to macro - then I timing push the heck out of him. If he wants to timing push, then I want to expand and make just enough to barely survive and then when my economy kicks in I'll win easy. My logic is that it's really hard to outmacro as protoss. Terran have mules, drones can be made by the dozen - chronoboost is nice, but it just doesn't keep up (especially if i want to boost an upgrade or warpgate tech).
Just my probably flawed strategic mindset. I guess I feel that protoss needs T3 units to win a mid-long game - and I get scared when other races macro because I know they'll pull way ahead in economy unless I pull a day9 expand every 4 minutes type build.
|
You guys need to take whatever Artosis says with a grain of salt ( or ignore it preferably ). He is so incredibly biased and whiny it taints his commentating. In season 1 he complained every single episode about not enough zergs in the Tournament. For season 3 he said 'to not worry about it'. Number of zergs in season 1? 16. Number of Protoss in season 3? 12.
|
Definitely going to try this against a Z next time I roll T in 1v1.
Spoilers:
The games I saw looked broken as hell. Rainbow would've won if he was on any other map than Shakuras he just waited a bit too long imo, and the rush distance didn't work.
This could easily cause a nerf to SCV/Mules in my opinion. SCV health makes this way harder to stop for Zerg, marines deal the damage and SCVs tank it. You have mules back home to make up for the ~8ish SCVS you sent and you can still be ahead in econ.
|
|
|
On November 23 2010 17:42 IdrA wrote:
its not even an anti-fast expand build, its nearly as good vs pool first
they can have 7-9 marines at your choke before speed finishes even if you 14 gas 14 pool, means you have to make constant lings off of pool first to just barely defend the rush, and the thing is if they scout you making pure lings they just put down a command center and are way ahead. even if you completely stop the rush you have a bunch of useless zerglings and they have more workers than you, and you have a late hatch.
its a build that can punish anything thats not purely defensive, but it sacrifices like 1 scv of economy.
Do you think a fast baneling nest or a fast roach transition into reverse pressure with the roaches would be a viable response to this sort of pressure?
|
i think this trend is disgusting. it makes me not even want to watch the GSL
Terrans seem to be even doing this against Protoss.
it's like Terran forgot how to expand or considers late game impossible to win.
none of these openings setup for an expansion. or atleast as IdrA put it. they only expand if you over commit to defending it.
so far. even tho it's only the 2nd day and it's the ro64. the games i've watched have been the worst games since beta. just marines marines. pull all scvs. it's ok i've got mules. more marines. all in. win or lose gg. next game.
i wish i had something more profound to say but i just feel sick in the stomach every game.
|
Its still strong vs 14 Pool 15 Hatch. The marines always get there before speed is done, so even if you scout it (which terrans can stop if they really want to) you have to throw stupid numbers of lings at it or you lose your Hatch.
If you dont scout it you lose even if you pool first.
Terrans wall off and kill the scouting overlord, since it's really easy to know where the OL will come from. Some maps you basically cant scout the entire base with a slow OL even if they dont try actively deny it
Edit: Im sitting at 2k and play terrans around the same range. Every ZvT I play is like this. I either scout it and throw tons of slow lings at the problem, or the T denies my scouting and walks over my base. I never 14 hatch.
|
Has anyone tried something like this as protoss? I feel like probes are weaker than SCVs, but maybe that's just because SCVs are all boxy and tough looking while probes look like...well...probes. Plus I don't think the "pew-pew-pew" stalkers shooting from behind the probes would really do very much damage. I guess zealots would be more appropriate. Be interesting to see.
|
On November 23 2010 17:56 MavercK wrote:
i think this trend is disgusting. it makes me not even want to watch the GSL
Terrans seem to be even doing this against Protoss.
it's like Terran forgot how to expand or considers late game impossible to win.
none of these openings setup for an expansion. or atleast as IdrA put it. they only expand if you over commit to defending it.
so far. even tho it's only the 2nd day and it's the ro64. the games i've watched have been the worst games since beta. just marines marines. pull all scvs. it's ok i've got mules. more marines. all in. win or lose gg. next game.
i wish i had something more profound to say but i just feel sick in the stomach every game.
You don't seem to mind when zerg wins 90% of the time just spamming mutas and banelings if terran doesn't all in.
Has anyone tried something like this as protoss? I feel like probes are weaker than SCVs, but maybe that's just because SCVs are all boxy and tough looking while probes look like...well...probes. Plus I don't think the "pew-pew-pew" stalkers shooting from behind the probes would really do very much damage. I guess zealots would be more appropriate. Be interesting to see.
Stalker damage vs light is atrocious. Zealots are melee so you don't get the meatshield benefit, it's possible you actually block the zealot out with probes.
|
On November 23 2010 17:56 Alay wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 17:42 IdrA wrote:
its not even an anti-fast expand build, its nearly as good vs pool first
they can have 7-9 marines at your choke before speed finishes even if you 14 gas 14 pool, means you have to make constant lings off of pool first to just barely defend the rush, and the thing is if they scout you making pure lings they just put down a command center and are way ahead. even if you completely stop the rush you have a bunch of useless zerglings and they have more workers than you, and you have a late hatch.
its a build that can punish anything thats not purely defensive, but it sacrifices like 1 scv of economy. Do you think a fast baneling nest or a fast roach transition into reverse pressure with the roaches would be a viable response to this sort of pressure?
the problem with that is its so easy to nullify hatch tech aggression, they put the barracks at the choke anyway so they have a thick wallin ready for banelings and 1-2 bunkers makes offensive roaches useless. the whole point is that this build requires an overwhelming response from z and its really easy for t to just make that response a waste of money.
|
It's not really that useful because stalkers come out much later and Protoss doesn't have a MULE. You're generally better off just doing some fast stalker aggression (until Z gets speed) if the map will permit it.
|
On November 23 2010 17:58 klauz619 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 17:56 MavercK wrote:
i think this trend is disgusting. it makes me not even want to watch the GSL
Terrans seem to be even doing this against Protoss.
it's like Terran forgot how to expand or considers late game impossible to win.
none of these openings setup for an expansion. or atleast as IdrA put it. they only expand if you over commit to defending it.
so far. even tho it's only the 2nd day and it's the ro64. the games i've watched have been the worst games since beta. just marines marines. pull all scvs. it's ok i've got mules. more marines. all in. win or lose gg. next game.
i wish i had something more profound to say but i just feel sick in the stomach every game. You don't seem to mind when zerg wins 90% of the time just spamming mutas and banelings if terran doesn't all in.
that wasn't a very interesting dynamic either. but atleast it was midgame and already multiple bases.
|
On November 23 2010 17:57 busdriver wrote:
Has anyone tried something like this as protoss? I feel like probes are weaker than SCVs, but maybe that's just because SCVs are all boxy and tough looking while probes look like...well...probes. Plus I don't think the "pew-pew-pew" stalkers shooting from behind the probes would really do very much damage. I guess zealots would be more appropriate. Be interesting to see.
If protoss had mules, then you would see this happening.
|
As long as Z continues to 14/15hatch every game, and as long as 2rax gives above 50% chance of winning it will continue this way, unless either A) Zerg finds a way to stop this attack at least 70-80% of the time, or B) starts to 1base play and force T into a mid/late macro game.
or C) they start using bigger maps in which case all races will FE every game...
|
On November 23 2010 17:58 klauz619 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 17:56 MavercK wrote:
i think this trend is disgusting. it makes me not even want to watch the GSL
Terrans seem to be even doing this against Protoss.
it's like Terran forgot how to expand or considers late game impossible to win.
none of these openings setup for an expansion. or atleast as IdrA put it. they only expand if you over commit to defending it.
so far. even tho it's only the 2nd day and it's the ro64. the games i've watched have been the worst games since beta. just marines marines. pull all scvs. it's ok i've got mules. more marines. all in. win or lose gg. next game.
i wish i had something more profound to say but i just feel sick in the stomach every game. You don't seem to mind when zerg wins 90% of the time just spamming mutas and banelings if terran doesn't all in.
There are lots of T's who know how to macro. Just because you dont doesnt mean its not possible. Late game Biomech terran is awesome and the ZvTs that end up like that are incredibly fun and are dead even
|
If you scout 2rax is it really that bad to get two spines instead of one? Yeah your econ isn't so great but I would assume you'd still be ahead considering it's 2rax and you're on two base (kinda like how vs 2gate you could cut drones for a long time until you drone pumped and would still be ahead). This is coming from a T who doesn't ever do this strat.
|
On November 23 2010 17:48 Piledriver wrote:
If zerg wants to be safe with early game expansions, they need to take late game nerfs. Otherwise they will continue winning tournaments left and right and only fools will believe this nonsense that "All zerg players are 10x more skilled than other races".
This is a terrible way to view the problem. If there are huge problems favoring zerg late game and terran early game then those problems don't balance eachother out. They both need to be fixed.
|
On November 23 2010 17:25 Epoch wrote:
14 hatch is nonsense and I'm glad terrans found ways to punish it. For a while all zergs were doing is 14 hatch, being completely safe, make like 2 zerglings a million drones. Hatch zlings and banelings when terran pushes out, because they have to push or they will lose, as it is their responsibility to be the aggressor since their late game sucks. And then BAM, wipe your entire army if u make 1 micro mistake. Once that first armies gone its game over. Now that was lame.
Now zergs have to maybe make a spawning pool first occasionally, and when they make that spawning pool they need to produce units for defense. Sounds good 2 me.
You clearly have deep understanding of this game.
To others, i would wait for Idra actually...he is aware of this build, and he has been working on it. So i assume that we will see the right way to counter it from him, if no1 else before.
Zerg will have to keep going for hatch between 14-21 thats for sure and keep droning as hard as possible.
Banelings might not even be an easy answer to this build, because marine/scv micro is getting really good even at mid diamond lvl.
|
On November 23 2010 18:02 FabledIntegral wrote:
If you scout 2rax is it really that bad to get two spines instead of one? Yeah your econ isn't so great but I would assume you'd still be ahead considering it's 2rax and you're on two base (kinda like how vs 2gate you could cut drones for a long time until you drone pumped and would still be ahead). This is coming from a T who doesn't ever do this strat.
I would say if you throw down 2 spines, and make some combination of speedling/roach/baneling in response to every time you see 2 early barracks yes zerg would be very far behind.
|
On November 23 2010 17:59 MavercK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 17:58 klauz619 wrote:On November 23 2010 17:56 MavercK wrote:
i think this trend is disgusting. it makes me not even want to watch the GSL
Terrans seem to be even doing this against Protoss.
it's like Terran forgot how to expand or considers late game impossible to win.
none of these openings setup for an expansion. or atleast as IdrA put it. they only expand if you over commit to defending it.
so far. even tho it's only the 2nd day and it's the ro64. the games i've watched have been the worst games since beta. just marines marines. pull all scvs. it's ok i've got mules. more marines. all in. win or lose gg. next game.
i wish i had something more profound to say but i just feel sick in the stomach every game. You don't seem to mind when zerg wins 90% of the time just spamming mutas and banelings if terran doesn't all in. that wasn't a very interesting dynamic either. but atleast it was midgame and already multiple bases.
Funny how it's fair if Terran loses badly in the midgame, but unfair and in need of fixing when Terran dominates in the early game.
Don't expect Terran players (myself included) to not be highly aggressive early game.
The current mid and late game dynamic just doesn't favor Terran so we have to compensate for that in the early game. Not doing that just so 'that there is a midgame' means 90% of the ZvT and PvT games would be incredibly one-sided. You play to win, not to cater to the opponent.
As for 14 hatch, it's an FE/Economic opening.
Regardless of race or even matchup, economic opening vs early aggression is always very risky.
The simple response is not to go 14 hatch and go something like 20 hatch instead.
|
Zerg gets to roaches = GG for Terran
Zerg gets to mid game = GG for Terran
It's sad that Terran has to gamble everything at the beginning to prevent Zerg from getting to roaches or mid-game. Blizzard really needs to do some tweaking because these Terran strats are simply gimmicks to avoid an inevtiable mid-game to late-game loss to Zerg.
|
On November 23 2010 17:58 IdrA wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 17:56 Alay wrote:On November 23 2010 17:42 IdrA wrote:
its not even an anti-fast expand build, its nearly as good vs pool first
they can have 7-9 marines at your choke before speed finishes even if you 14 gas 14 pool, means you have to make constant lings off of pool first to just barely defend the rush, and the thing is if they scout you making pure lings they just put down a command center and are way ahead. even if you completely stop the rush you have a bunch of useless zerglings and they have more workers than you, and you have a late hatch.
its a build that can punish anything thats not purely defensive, but it sacrifices like 1 scv of economy. Do you think a fast baneling nest or a fast roach transition into reverse pressure with the roaches would be a viable response to this sort of pressure? the problem with that is its so easy to nullify hatch tech aggression, they put the barracks at the choke anyway so they have a thick wallin ready for banelings and 1-2 bunkers makes offensive roaches useless. the whole point is that this build requires an overwhelming response from z and its really easy for t to just make that response a waste of money.
I think the real abuse stems from this point where T can just as easily punish the Z compensating so hard.
Do you think this will be as detrimental to gameplay as the 6rax reaper opening? It's hard for me to imagine a scenario where Zerg can go "oh ****, if I do A + B, it'll counter this marine/scv pressure." due to how early the pressure comes and how few tech options are open to Z at that time.
|
Just scout well and be prepared to pull drones for the bunkers at your ramp. Then crawlers with a few lings hold off any kind of marine aggression.
|
On November 23 2010 18:07 Thezzy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 17:59 MavercK wrote:On November 23 2010 17:58 klauz619 wrote:On November 23 2010 17:56 MavercK wrote:
i think this trend is disgusting. it makes me not even want to watch the GSL
Terrans seem to be even doing this against Protoss.
it's like Terran forgot how to expand or considers late game impossible to win.
none of these openings setup for an expansion. or atleast as IdrA put it. they only expand if you over commit to defending it.
so far. even tho it's only the 2nd day and it's the ro64. the games i've watched have been the worst games since beta. just marines marines. pull all scvs. it's ok i've got mules. more marines. all in. win or lose gg. next game.
i wish i had something more profound to say but i just feel sick in the stomach every game. You don't seem to mind when zerg wins 90% of the time just spamming mutas and banelings if terran doesn't all in. that wasn't a very interesting dynamic either. but atleast it was midgame and already multiple bases. Funny how it's fair if Terran loses badly in the midgame, but unfair and in need of fixing when Terran dominates in the early game. Don't expect Terran players (myself included) to not be highly aggressive early game. The current mid and late game dynamic just doesn't favor Terran so we have to compensate for that in the early game. Not doing that just so 'that there is a midgame' means 90% of the ZvT and PvT games would be incredibly one-sided. You play to win, not to cater to the opponent. As for 14 hatch, it's an FE/Economic opening. Regardless of race or even matchup, economic opening vs early aggression is always very risky. The simple response is not to go 14 hatch and go something like 20 hatch instead.
i wish people would stop reading my post as if i was saying the game is broken and terran should be nerfed and that i'm perfectly fine with TvZ mid game. stop assuming or reading between the lines because your wrong.
fact is my thoughts are simple. Terrans are just doing this boring 1 base all ins with marines and scvs. every. god damn. game. in the GSL so far. thats all im saying and how disgusting it is to watch.
|
On November 23 2010 18:08 StarcraftMan wrote:
Zerg gets to roaches = GG for Terran
Zerg gets to mid game = GG for Terran
It's sad that Terran has to gamble everything at the beginning to prevent Zerg from getting to roaches or mid-game. Blizzard really needs to do some tweaking because these Terran strats are simply gimmicks to avoid an inevtiable mid-game to late-game loss to Zerg.
Do you really think that shitposting will convince blizzard to buff terran? Plenty of Terrans know how to macro and do well mid/late game. The idea that they cant was a theory created by idiots who have no idea how to play, people like you. The fact you think roaches are GG for terran confirms it.
|
there hasnt been many large foreign tournaments to my knowledge since this 2 racks marine scv pressure became popular.
do you guys think we will see terrans using this type of play @ dreamhack?
|
1) its not played for that long,so give some good Z time to find a way around it.
2) im pretty sure you can defend it on most maps (14 hatch on steppes anyone?) with proper scouting and the right reaction (imo banes).
3) i think its a great strategical way for terran to open since it allows for expansion,early pressure and possible all in if Z gets to greedy. and i think,since Z macro and map control is really strong even in the early mid game,thats what T needs.
4) Its not like terran can expand,pressure and tech up at the sime time.
5) I think with roaches you could probably defend and even counterpush the terran to death since the marines have no shield/stim
just my 2 cents.
|
Unfortunately, I think a lot of the complaints about this build, are oriented around it just not being entertaining to watch. I realize this tournament has a lot of money on the line, so playing to win is the priority, but this is *supposed* to be a spectator sport, and watching 7 minute games that can easily go either way do not allow for players to showcase much of their skill, nor are they entertaining for the viewer.
Unfortunately, unless the metagame changes drastically mid-season, I think this is what we have to expect from the rest of the GSL.
|
On November 23 2010 18:16 lim1017 wrote:
there hasnt been many large foreign tournaments to my knowledge since this 2 racks marine scv pressure became popular.
do you guys think we will see terrans using this type of play @ dreamhack? The really important point in all of this is that it creates a nearly unstoppable amount of pressure for the Zerg to deal with. If foreigners have seen this build (I'm sure they have), they will almost certainly be practicing it against a 14 hatch. When there is money on the line, it is hard to blame players for using really abusive builds. It's like Morrow pulling the 6rax reaper on idrA at IEM. It's mean and abusive but it wins you games.
|
I have a hard time believing that zerg has to go 14 hatch every game on every map to have a chance to win. Is it really the case that not 14 hatching puts you behind? The way it stands it just looks like Zerg is thinking to themselves that they can do it safely because Terran has not extremely early cheese anymore.
|
Since we are on the "we should have gentlemen agreements in SCII", I will agree to give up my 2 rax push if zergs I play agree to wait for my army to reach equal food count after every late game battle. I think you'll find you have a lot of waiting to do.
|
well the push comes around the 5 minute mark. find a way to feel safe vs a marine scv push at 5 minutes and you are good. (for instance at 5 minutes my lair finishes in my standard build), i could use this + a fast baneling nest to start getting burrow or baneling speed to be able to defend the push at 5 minutes and then prevent take the reigns a couple minutes after. also i could get an overseer (or 2) as a response to the 2 rax. and if they push out with scvs go goop their command center, crippling their economy, even with mules.
you just have to think of ways to do things with what you have.
EDIT: to the poster above me, you shoudl stop losing late game battles that badly then 
|
So... why can't Zerg just defend the same way they did in BW, and then pump the hell out of drones from behind a few queens and spine crawlers?
|
On November 23 2010 18:26 PrinceXizor wrote:
well the push comes around the 5 minute mark. find a way to feel safe vs a marine scv push at 5 minutes and you are good. (for instance at 5 minutes my lair finishes in my standard build), i could use this + a fast baneling nest to start getting burrow or baneling speed to be able to defend the push at 5 minutes and then prevent take the reigns a couple minutes after. also i could get an overseer (or 2) as a response to the 2 rax. and if they push out with scvs go goop their command center, crippling their economy, even with mules.
you just have to think of ways to do things with what you have.
Lair finishing at 5 minutes should not be standard in any matchup. Even if the Terran hits you with a standard 3Rax+stim push or a Protoss player hits you with a 4gate... there's absolutely no way to defend a 5min Lair and still have a healthy economy for the midgame.
|
Ok, do you guys really think that out of the blue every top korean Terran just decided that they'd start doing marine/scv all-in variations because it's the "standard thing to do?"
Does anyone remember beta waaaaaaaaay back when? Zerg was the strongest race for a reason in korea. It wasn't because lings were too powerful (ok 1 supply roach but ignore that), it wasn't because they had a magical unit composition that beat everything else...it was because every good Zerg knew that IF they could defend to a certain point in the game, they could power drone 20+ workers ahead of their opponent, stack up larva, suicide their army -> remax -> and basically never lose a macro game late game.
I do not understand how the majority of people here can look so one dimensionally at all of these TvZ games and say, "oh yeah, they're just punishing greedy Zergs that are 14 hatching" or "they just want to win the game fast."
It's more of an underlying problem that all of these pros understand - playing Zerg in a macro game past the 10 minute mark or so is damn tough (if not impossible). As Zerg the goal is always to defend until you are into the macro game, it's very, very difficult to lose ZvT once you reach that point.
So this isn't a necessarily "new trend" at all - it's been in the works since the most recent patch, and finally you're starting to see every top T doing their best to usurp the TvZ lategame difficulties by simply all-inning, semi-allining, or feint-all-ining to gain an advantage or win the game outright.
It really pains me when people are even bashing intotherainbow saying he played terrible, etc etc. or "why the fuck would he do these 'gimmicky' 'all-in' builds." He's doing them because they are right now the best possible shot at winning TvZ series.
Go back over every GSL game and top level TvZ game, as well as other top TvZ games. Do you notice the trend? Terrans usually win around the 10-15 min point (or earlier), or have gained some advantage from an all-in or banshee shinanigans.
Sure, every now and then you see someone play a "macro game" vs zerg, like Nada did, but most of the times Terran has lost those. And the times you do see a TvZ go into a "macro game" the Terran absolutely did something to gain a huge advantage early to be even attempting a management game.
So yeh...what did people really expect Terrans to do? Roll over and die? These mass marine all-ins and variations are the best possible ways to beat Zerg now. Mech is dead because it gives zerg a free 3rd/4th and then they just mass roach/infestor neural you.
This marine stuff is the last stuff possible to take games off of good Zs =/
|
I agree that these matches are pretty boring to watch. Almost all you see is Zerg going 14 hatch, then Terran countering with a 2 rax all in. It either works or doesn't, match over in 5 mins.
This build is just Terran's response to Zerg going 14 hatch most games. I don't know why people are surprised there's a decent counter to going hatch before pool, considering economy opens vs all in aggression usually doesn't turn out well for economy.
Though I can admit, it is hard to hold off considering terrans can throw away SCVs and use mules where if a Zerg pulls drones he's blocking his lings and destroying his economy.
|
On November 23 2010 18:16 Caryc wrote:
1) its not played for that long,so give some good Z time to find a way around it.
2) im pretty sure you can defend it on most maps (14 hatch on steppes anyone?) with proper scouting and the right reaction (imo banes).
3) i think its a great strategical way for terran to open since it allows for expansion,early pressure and possible all in if Z gets to greedy. and i think,since Z macro and map control is really strong even in the early mid game,thats what T needs.
4) Its not like terran can expand,pressure and tech up at the sime time.
5) I think with roaches you could probably defend and even counterpush the terran to death since the marines have no shield/stim
just my 2 cents.
I don't think you get the problem. The problem isn't even stopping it. It is probably very possible to stop it and be ahead if they marine/svc all in and you went some combination of speedling/baneling/roach. The problem is that terran can easily scan a zergs base to get a good idea of drone saturatoin/ tech and decide from there what to do. If they see a zerg has good defenses they have damaged the zerg economically by throwing down a second barracks early in the game.
|
On November 23 2010 18:28 Durn wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 18:26 PrinceXizor wrote:
well the push comes around the 5 minute mark. find a way to feel safe vs a marine scv push at 5 minutes and you are good. (for instance at 5 minutes my lair finishes in my standard build), i could use this + a fast baneling nest to start getting burrow or baneling speed to be able to defend the push at 5 minutes and then prevent take the reigns a couple minutes after. also i could get an overseer (or 2) as a response to the 2 rax. and if they push out with scvs go goop their command center, crippling their economy, even with mules.
you just have to think of ways to do things with what you have. Lair finishing at 5 minutes should not be standard in any matchup. Even if the Terran hits you with a standard 3Rax+stim push or a Protoss player hits you with a 4gate... there's absolutely no way to defend a 5min Lair and still have a healthy economy for the midgame.
heh. i go 14 hatch 14 gas 13 pool. i get lair as soon as pool finishes. whether i do anything with the lair (besides an overseer/overlord speed for fast scouting when most zergs are in the dark) is up to me. the difference between my going fast lair and you going fast speed + queen is that i spend 300/100 on a queen + lair and you spend 250/100 on queen and ling speed. and then i get ling speed either while the lair is building or i get infestors around the 6 minute mark when a more standard attack timing exists vs Terran.
|
On November 23 2010 18:26 PrinceXizor wrote:EDIT: to the poster above me, you shoudl stop losing late game battles that badly then
Problem isn't the first 200/200 battle, it's every encounter after that when zerg manages to recover just a bit faster until he's in my base while I'm still not on a strong enough army or destroying my expos while I'm not even close to a decent sized defense; I'm just forced to defend hoping he screws up badly.
|
On November 23 2010 18:29 avilo wrote:
Ok, do you guys really think that out of the blue every top korean Terran just decided that they'd start doing marine/scv all-in variations because it's the "standard thing to do?"
Does anyone remember beta waaaaaaaaay back when? Zerg was the strongest race for a reason in korea. It wasn't because lings were too powerful (ok 1 supply roach but ignore that), it wasn't because they had a magical unit composition that beat everything else...it was because every good Zerg knew that IF they could defend to a certain point in the game, they could power drone 20+ workers ahead of their opponent, stack up larva, suicide their army -> remax -> and basically never lose a macro game late game.
I do not understand how the majority of people here can look so one dimensionally at all of these TvZ games and say, "oh yeah, they're just punishing greedy Zergs that are 14 hatching" or "they just want to win the game fast."
It's more of an underlying problem that all of these pros understand - playing Zerg in a macro game past the 10 minute mark or so is damn tough (if not impossible). As Zerg the goal is always to defend until you are into the macro game, it's very, very difficult to lose ZvT once you reach that point.
So this isn't a necessarily "new trend" at all - it's been in the works since the most recent patch, and finally you're starting to see every top T doing their best to usurp the TvZ lategame difficulties by simply all-inning, semi-allining, or feint-all-ining to gain an advantage or win the game outright.
It really pains me when people are even bashing intotherainbow saying he played terrible, etc etc. or "why the fuck would he do these 'gimmicky' 'all-in' builds." He's doing them because they are right now the best possible shot at winning TvZ series.
Go back over every GSL game and top level TvZ game, as well as other top TvZ games. Do you notice the trend? Terrans usually win around the 10-15 min point (or earlier), or have gained some advantage from an all-in or banshee shinanigans.
Sure, every now and then you see someone play a "macro game" vs zerg, like Nada did, but most of the times Terran has lost those. And the times you do see a TvZ go into a "macro game" the Terran absolutely did something to gain a huge advantage early to be even attempting a management game.
So yeh...what did people really expect Terrans to do? Roll over and die? These mass marine all-ins and variations are the best possible ways to beat Zerg now. Mech is dead because it gives zerg a free 3rd/4th and then they just mass roach/infestor neural you.
This marine stuff is the last stuff possible to take games off of good Zs =/ I agree that Zerg has the possibility to be a macro monster but I really think you have no grounds by which to say a Terran player can't take a Zerg player in the mid game.
Tank pushes and MMM Balls didn't suddenly become unusable against a 4range Roach... if you watch any games from the last GSL, Terrans were taking games off of Zergs left and right with standard play. hence 3 Terran, 1 Zerg in the Semi Finals.
However, to say the Zerg has become so OP in the mid game that Terran has no choice but to crush them with cheese is absolutely ridiculous. Strong Banshee (or any of Terrans available harassing openers) play with proper reactions to Zerg tech can build an army into the mid game that will crush a Zerg player.
I want to end this post by saying I hate theorycrafting and just throwing builds at eachother and being like "YEAH WELL THIS BUILD BEATS THAT BUILD BUT THIS BUILD SUCKS". It gets the argument nowhere because every player likes to believe that their race is being shat on. I get that. But when a Terran opener can crush almost any Zerg opener (as we've seen COUNTLESS evidence of in the GSL), it's hard for me to take you seriously when you tell me that Zerg is still the problem.
|
On November 23 2010 18:29 avilo wrote:
So yeh...what did people really expect Terrans to do? Roll over and die? These mass marine all-ins and variations are the best possible ways to beat Zerg now. Mech is dead because it gives zerg a free 3rd/4th and then they just mass roach/infestor neural you.
This marine stuff is the last stuff possible to take games off of good Zs =/
The opinion of anyone who bashes the players for their choice of strategy or winning using cheese can be ignored. In a tournament with this much money every player should do whatever it takes to win. There is no honor in losing by playing macro game.
The balance of the game is what is being discussed. If the balance of the game relies on terrans only chance being gimmicks that are successful then there is a problem. If late game terran can't win against late game zerg then there is a problem. If the standard strategy for terran is to end the game with 2-4 rax and a shitload of scv then there is a problem. This thread is to discuss the new trends in zvt and how they are trending towards boring bad games.
|
On November 23 2010 18:34 dakalro wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 18:26 PrinceXizor wrote:EDIT: to the poster above me, you shoudl stop losing late game battles that badly then Problem isn't the first 200/200 battle, it's every encounter after that when zerg manages to recover just a bit faster until he's in my base while I'm still not on a strong enough army or destroying my expos while I'm not even close to a decent sized defense; I'm just forced to defend hoping he screws up badly.
A Properly upgraded, maintained, and positioned terran army will always come out ahead in food if playing vs a zerg. unless brood lords in numbers of 10 or more exist. but thats more due to how the game works. zerg can wear down on terran enough to cause issues, terran only can't hold them off if they didn't expand enough.
EDIT: i'm allowed my opinion ^^
|
I think Terrans need to take note of the second game of Jys vs. ZergBong. Very unorthodox way to play, but actually pretty decent. I also like the idea of having Planetary Fortresses to create an artificial choke of a death wall, yes they are expensive as hell. But one is hard enough to break, imagine 2 or 3. You'd need Broodlords. Which get rocked hard by vikings. He also got some of the less frequently gotten upgrades, like Missile Turret and Planetary Fortress range.
Edit: Third game, on Shakuras.
|
On November 23 2010 18:38 DreamSailor wrote:
I think Terrans need to take note of the second game of Jys vs. ZergBong. Very unorthodox way to play, but actually pretty decent. I also like the idea of having Planetary Fortresses to create an artificial choke of a death wall, yes they are expensive as hell. But one is hard enough to break, imagine 2 or 3. You'd need Broodlords. Which get rocked hard by vikings. He also got some of the less frequently gotten upgrades, like Missile Turret and Planetary Fortress range.
his second upgrade from the engineering bay was building armor upgrade also. he transitioned into PFs too late i think. had he done it 2 minutes earlier he would have dominated.
|
I wonder how spine crawlers could affect this playstyle.
|
On November 23 2010 18:42 Mainland wrote:
I wonder how spine crawlers could affect this playstyle.
Spine crawlers are pretty expensive, but I think solo, a spine crawler can stop ~5-6 marines. It starts getting less effective the more marines there are and you need to start increasing the spine crawler numbers.
|
On November 23 2010 18:37 PrinceXizor wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 18:34 dakalro wrote:On November 23 2010 18:26 PrinceXizor wrote:EDIT: to the poster above me, you shoudl stop losing late game battles that badly then Problem isn't the first 200/200 battle, it's every encounter after that when zerg manages to recover just a bit faster until he's in my base while I'm still not on a strong enough army or destroying my expos while I'm not even close to a decent sized defense; I'm just forced to defend hoping he screws up badly. A Properly upgraded, maintained, and positioned terran army will always come out ahead in food if playing vs a zerg. unless brood lords in numbers of 10 or more exist.
And the battle will be fought away from zerg bases, and by the time I'm in your base with the leftovers you've got defense and more on the way - with the proper composition to counter my attack even, and we're back to speed of army recovery where zerg has the upper hand, in that you get back enough, fast enough, to destroy econ freely for a few seconds. Ofc I mean the time when you have both gspire and ultra cavern up or plenty of econ to get them up asap.
The midgame is not really balanced in favor of zerg but anything involving close to 200/200 army and full tech options is and midgame is balanced enough that defense is possible without much slowdown - 50-50 you get to tech up and gain a significant bonus to win chance.
It is that reason terran chooses to fight where chances of slowdown or win are higher. Unfortunately it is not too entertaining to watch but until blizzard removes the option of attack units in the first 5 minutes, why not?
|
I personally think Blizzard will probably nerf this because starcraft isn't meant to be played like this. The games are very short and very few units are used. An early push to harass your opponent is acceptable but killing them straight out just feels like the game lacks depth. I find this very similar to the mass reaper opening, which was considered OP.
|
I think its not safe to go hatch now even in NA server terrans are adapting to this strategy
Zerg "the swarm" its just right that zerg should be stronger at late game since but i still think tier 3 is so dam slow ( it takes 3+ base to fully produce tier 3 units)
Terran have units to prevent that (banshees, blue ignite hellions, stim bio ball) and while harassing they can easily take and defend third with a PF
The only problem with jys vs nestea is that the terran didn't move out while zerg has 5 bases i think
|
Starcraft is meant to be played in such a way as to destroy all enemy buildings or force your opponent to surrender, have yet to see the Official Blizzard Rules and Regulations on how to play SCII.
|
Earlier this week i got 2 rax'd when i went 14 hatch and there are alot of little tricks you can use to fend it off alot easier. for instance. get your first queen at your nat, and spread creep first. (and then inject). you get enough lings to defend still AND they get a speed boost and can surround easier. not to mention bunker prevention. the faster lair is something else that works against it, and third. putting down the 100/50 for a baneling nest whether you use it or not early won't kill you tbh.
|
All i think when i see this:
Wow... SCV's are strong.
Wow... Mules keep him in game pretty long, wtf?
|
I don't think it is cheese at all. Terrans can trade workers because they have mules to keep their econ going, so they just throw a bunch of SCV's in with their early aggression. It's very calculated.
|
But if they want to keep up their econ they lose the scan so they will blindly push into your defense. If they scanned and attack you've just finished ahead if you manage the defense.
|
On November 23 2010 18:52 dakalro wrote:
Starcraft is meant to be played in such a way as to destroy all enemy buildings or force your opponent to surrender, have yet to see the Official Blizzard Rules and Regulations on how to play SCII.
Here is a rule, barracks after supply depot.
|
I don't see 2 rax pressure bypassing that rule. That was done for the proxy rax rush not for 2 rax pressure into win or CC.
|
Marine buildtime +5s and Baneling Range +1 could fix the problem
oh wait...
|
On November 23 2010 16:39 FataLe wrote:
This reminds me of PvT where you guess wrong you lose.
As Protoss of course, seeing how Terran seems to have a free ticket to midgame, every game.
A free ticket to where the tide swings in favor of protoss, wow what a valuable ticket. It reminds me of that movie Last Action Hero, except without any of the fun, and the ticket is actually a piece of shit that you have to eat.
|
I never had trouble against this. Mainly because my style has always been FE into an agressive fast speedling/baneling pressure.
|
On November 23 2010 18:50 DarkRise wrote:
I think its not safe to go hatch now even in NA server terrans are adapting to this strategy
Zerg "the swarm" its just right that zerg should be stronger at late game since but i still think tier 3 is so dam slow ( it takes 3+ base to fully produce tier 3 units)
Terran have units to prevent that (banshees, blue ignite hellions, stim bio ball) and while harassing they can easily take and defend third with a PF
The only problem with jys vs nestea is that the terran didn't move out while zerg has 5 bases i think
It doesn't just punish hatch-first. Even if you pool first you are at risk of bring stomped unless you spam lings. That's what's frustrating. If he denies scouting, you'll lose your expo (even IF you went pool first). If the terran stutter-steps, there is no way slow lings can kill them. You just stall until speed is done. Meanwhile the Terran is happily teching and probably taking an expansion. You have very few drones and some leftover useless units, assuming you aren't dead.
|
Blizzard said thay dont want the game to be like "I have a good chance to win untill 12-15 minute mark, than Im screwed.." Now, it seems like TvP and TvZ in particular goes exactly like this. Expect to see some balance tweaks so that we wont see all those all-ins to counter 14 hatch or brainless MMM stimming to death.. So for those guys that say "This is how Terran is designed, deal with it.." sorry, but you are wrong. They (either Blizz or players themself) will make Terran macro play more viable (through patches, units from expansions, etc..) because no one wants to play or watch this kind of stereotype boring play that involves 2-3 units at maximum..
|
http://nerdnugget.com/download/file.php?id=102
Here is a replay of me going 13 pool 15 hatch and still getting stomped. Lings/queen aren't early enough to stop the blind bunker wall-in, as its a no-brainer for my Terran opponent because 1-base Zerg is auto-lose.
I manage to actually kill the bunkers without losing a hatch, though the damage is already enough that i can't hold back the stim marine/marauder push 5 min later.
The best part?
His macro is TERRIBLE and I am still literally 8 workers ahead of me after his retarded bunker rush. At no point in the game do I have a better econ than him.
I think I'm going back to hatch first, even pool first doesn't stop the bunker nonsense.
ps: lol at me rage
|
Ok, do you guys really think that out of the blue every top korean Terran just decided that they'd start doing marine/scv all-in variations because it's the "standard thing to do?"
they are doing that because that is what the easiest way they can win. Koreans have no obligation to enter the macro game, they all want to win. So they are using all-inns and timing rushes.
|
people will do whatever works and until people learn to counter this they'll keep doing it. i feel that a fast expand should always be slightly risky, and hatch before pool is totally audacious. in any case, an SCV rush with marines is old news. like SlayerS_BoxeR old.
i believe that someone already mentioned this but in the early game spine crawlers are pretty cost effective against marines, one spine crawler is worth 6 marines or so. of course the bigger the numbers get the worse the spine crawlers will perform.
it's definitely a cheese and an all-in and the terran will lose if he doesn't do terrible terrible damage. the only thing that differentiates this cheese from any other is that it's easy to do that damage.
|
On November 23 2010 21:21 Everlong wrote:
Blizzard said thay dont want the game to be like "I have a good chance to win untill 12-15 minute mark, than Im screwed.." Now, it seems like TvP and TvZ in particular goes exactly like this. Expect to see some balance tweaks so that we wont see all those all-ins to counter 14 hatch or brainless MMM stimming to death.. So for those guys that say "This is how Terran is designed, deal with it.." sorry, but you are wrong. They (either Blizz or players themself) will make Terran macro play more viable (through patches, units from expansions, etc..) because no one wants to play or watch this kind of stereotype boring play that involves 2-3 units at maximum..
And this idea pisses me off too.
The argument that Terrans are behind in late-game macro is so full of holes it's not even funny.
MULEs give Terrans the best econ out there. 1 MULE = 4 drones at 150 cost for the OC and 0 supply. Simple math: You payed 150 minerals for 100 minerals worth of units and 4 SUPPLY FREE WORKERS THAT RESPAWN EVERY 30 SECONDS REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE KILLED!!! Terran has no reason to be behind in econ as you proceed on to late-game.
Everybody should already agree that Terran has the best all-around army, especially in terms of TvZ.
The only thing cost-effective against marines is hero banelings. This isn't banelings in general, for the most part you're spending 50/25 on a unit that will do nothing. But every now-and-then, you get 2-3 banelings that take out 10 marines each, those 3 guys made the game possible.
The only thing cost-effective vs Thors is Zerglings, and do we really need to go into how badly countered Zerglings are by literally every Terran unit including the Thor? go ahead, open up a unit tester, make 6 thors and 100 zerglings, put the Thors on a wall and watch them win. Incase you missed that 6 Thors can beat 100 zerglings.
I could go on, but those are two fine examples, everybody should know that its hard to lose money with ALL terran units when used properly.
Then we add to that bases that can't be easily harassed or taken. Turrets for inexplicably twice as good as photon cannons and spore crawlers. A bunker with 4 stimmed-marines can out-dps 2 of any other static defense in the game as well as give back a 100 mineral refund when it's not needed anymore.
Anyway, I gotta go to work so I'll stop with pointing out holes in this "no late-game macro" argument and just leave it at this:
Terran has no late-game macro because they have no idea how to play past the marine/marauder all-in push phase. There really is no reason to try and tech past.
|
On November 23 2010 21:31 Jermstuddog wrote:http://nerdnugget.com/download/file.php?id=102Here is a replay of me going 13 pool 15 hatch and still getting stomped. Lings/queen aren't early enough to stop the blind bunker wall-in, as its a no-brainer for my Terran opponent because 1-base Zerg is auto-lose. I manage to actually kill the bunkers without losing a hatch, though the damage is already enough that i can't hold back the stim marine/marauder push 5 min later. The best part? His macro is TERRIBLE and I am still literally 8 workers ahead of me after his retarded bunker rush. At no point in the game do I have a better econ than him. I think I'm going back to hatch first, even pool first doesn't stop the bunker nonsense. ps: lol at me rage
Someone actually already gave very good advice on this, queen built on expo, creep first on expo (no bunker wallin, extra speed).
|
Yeah these builds are ridiculously strong.
Hell I even get Banelings but still cannot win. Having Zerglingspeed for 100 gas and than building banelings while tryting to get a lot Zerglings up as well is just so hard.
And then you got 6 banelings when he approaches and... you kill most of his SCVs with the Banelings and then... just die to his Marines. :f
It's not impossible to hold off both it requires kinda blind counter.
Did anyone watch FruitDealer vs Foxer in this Gstar games? He kinda did everything right and still lost with tons of Banelings/Zerglings and 3 Base against pure Marine, Rauder and Medivacs.
|
wtf? All of a sudden hatch before pool is "necessary"? Are you people joking?
|
On November 23 2010 16:41 Kraz.Del wrote:
Blizz can't even patch it; the metagame is moving waaaaayyyy too fast.
This is why they shouldn't be so fast to patch things. They should wait for the metagame to stabilize more. Zerg were already figuring out how to beat Terrans in GSL Season 1, but the patch came out right before Season 2. They completely broke reapers, and now roaches are now far to strong against Protoss. People are now starting to complain that marines are OP and despite all this, we will probably have our third Zerg GSL champion.
|
On November 23 2010 21:56 Jermstuddog wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 21:21 Everlong wrote:
Blizzard said thay dont want the game to be like "I have a good chance to win untill 12-15 minute mark, than Im screwed.." Now, it seems like TvP and TvZ in particular goes exactly like this. Expect to see some balance tweaks so that we wont see all those all-ins to counter 14 hatch or brainless MMM stimming to death.. So for those guys that say "This is how Terran is designed, deal with it.." sorry, but you are wrong. They (either Blizz or players themself) will make Terran macro play more viable (through patches, units from expansions, etc..) because no one wants to play or watch this kind of stereotype boring play that involves 2-3 units at maximum.. Terran has no late-game macro because they have no idea how to play past the marine/marauder all-in push phase. There really is no reason to try and tech past.
Great insult there. Actually assuming, without even thinking how illogical what you say is, that no terran player was smart enough to have ever ever thought about macro games and they're all wrong and you as a zerg are smarter and somehow found the holy grail ... I applaud you. All terrans should stop rushing and put together each of their 1 neuron and reach a higher level of consciousness that you seem to have and develop proper macro strategies. I bow to the almighty zerg overmind. Puny humans should learn from your infinite wisdom oh mighty Jermstuddog
|
In defense of blizzard this is probably why they wait so long to patch things and go by the math. Everyone freaks out about everything because of two days of gsl games.
|
I think it´s just fair, there is no way building a second base and being safe was fair ...
|
On November 23 2010 22:05 dakalro wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 21:56 Jermstuddog wrote:On November 23 2010 21:21 Everlong wrote:
Blizzard said thay dont want the game to be like "I have a good chance to win untill 12-15 minute mark, than Im screwed.." Now, it seems like TvP and TvZ in particular goes exactly like this. Expect to see some balance tweaks so that we wont see all those all-ins to counter 14 hatch or brainless MMM stimming to death.. So for those guys that say "This is how Terran is designed, deal with it.." sorry, but you are wrong. They (either Blizz or players themself) will make Terran macro play more viable (through patches, units from expansions, etc..) because no one wants to play or watch this kind of stereotype boring play that involves 2-3 units at maximum.. And this idea pisses me off too. The argument that Terrans are behind in late-game macro is so full of holes it's not even funny. MULEs give Terrans the best econ out there. 1 MULE = 4 drones at 150 cost for the OC and 0 supply. Simple math: You payed 150 minerals for 100 minerals worth of units and 4 SUPPLY FREE WORKERS THAT RESPAWN EVERY 30 SECONDS REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE KILLED!!! Terran has no reason to be behind in econ as you proceed on to late-game. Everybody should already agree that Terran has the best all-around army, especially in terms of TvZ. The only thing cost-effective against marines is hero banelings. This isn't banelings in general, for the most part you're spending 50/25 on a unit that will do nothing. But every now-and-then, you get 2-3 banelings that take out 10 marines each, those 3 guys made the game possible. The only thing cost-effective vs Thors is Zerglings, and do we really need to go into how badly countered Zerglings are by literally every Terran unit including the Thor? go ahead, open up a unit tester, make 6 thors and 100 zerglings, put the Thors on a wall and watch them win. Incase you missed that 6 Thors can beat 100 zerglings. I could go on, but those are two fine examples, everybody should know that its hard to lose money with ALL terran units when used properly. Then we add to that bases that can't be easily harassed or taken. Turrets for inexplicably twice as good as photon cannons and spore crawlers. A bunker with 4 stimmed-marines can out-dps 2 of any other static defense in the game as well as give back a 100 mineral refund when it's not needed anymore. Anyway, I gotta go to work so I'll stop with pointing out holes in this "no late-game macro" argument and just leave it at this: Terran has no late-game macro because they have no idea how to play past the marine/marauder all-in push phase. There really is no reason to try and tech past. Great insult there. Actually assuming, without even thinking how illogical what you say is, that no terran player was smart enough to have ever ever thought about macro games and they're all wrong and you as a zerg are smarter and somehow found the holy grail ... I applaud you. All terrans should stop rushing and put together each of their 1 neuron and reach a higher level of consciousness that you seem to have and develop proper macro strategies. I bow to the almighty zerg overmind. Puny humans should learn from your infinite wisdom oh mighty Jermstuddog
Great insult there... Oh wait.
|
On November 23 2010 22:08 noD wrote:
I think it´s just fair, there is no way building a second base and being safe was fair ...
Too bad that if you stay on one base you lose the game anyway...
Blizzard should fix this soon,it shouldn't be about "OMG i gotta stay alive for 10 minutes"
|
You don't HAVE to go hatch first, sure its great if you can get away with it, but it's not safe by any means. I personnally like my 20 hatch with ling speed early, it doesnt put you ahead, but atleast you don't die (well you are more likely to survive).
|
On November 23 2010 22:03 out4blood wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 16:41 Kraz.Del wrote:
Blizz can't even patch it; the metagame is moving waaaaayyyy too fast. This is why they shouldn't be so fast to patch things. They should wait for the metagame to stabilize more. Zerg were already figuring out how to beat Terrans in GSL Season 1, but the patch came out right before Season 2. They completely broke reapers, and now roaches are now far to strong against Protoss. People are now starting to complain that marines are OP and despite all this, we will probably have our third Zerg GSL champion.
I would absolutely say that it's probably too early to patch the game in response to this build, but the last patch they waited plenty long for. Despite FruitDealer winning GSL1, zergs were not starting to figure out the matchup. It was a total fluke that FruitDealer won. I am pretty sure he was only zerg in top 8. In the RO4 he all-inned vs protoss and got lucky. Vs hopetorture hopetorture played absolutely terrible while fruitdealer played perfect. Season 2 had 3 Terrans in the top 4 and none of them were using these new builds. Absolutely not proof that zerg was patched too early.
|
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.
|
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).
|
Frankly it looks to me like the Terran equivalent of a 4-gate.
And NesTea showed us you can hold it off, always, if you're baller enough.
He fast-expanded on close positions blind on Metalopolis in the GSL2 finals, vs Foxer himself, despite losing two games just before that doing the same thing.
That is unequivocally insane. That is an extreme example. That is not something I recommend.
But he had learned how to deal with it, and comfortably crushed the all-in he suckered in with this.
So you can definitely deal with it under more normal FE conditions (shakuras, scrap, x-position anything).
Yes, Artosis was just plain wrong. I am astounded.
I have an anti-foxer build for every map I play - including Steppes and Blistering.
|
On November 23 2010 22:25 DaemonX wrote:
Frankly it looks to me like the Terran equivalent of a 4-gate.
And NesTea showed us you can hold it off, always, if you're baller enough.
He fast-expanded on close positions blind on Metalopolis in the GSL2 finals, vs Foxer himself, despite losing two games just before that doing the same thing.
That is unequivocally insane. That is an extreme example. That is not something I recommend.
But he had learned how to deal with it, and comfortably crushed the all-in he suckered in with this.
So you can definitely deal with it under more normal FE conditions (shakuras, scrap, x-position anything).
Yes, Artosis was just plain wrong. I am astounded.
No you are wrong, what Foxer used was an unrefined version of this all-in. He executed it very poorly too. The GSL2 final really is not a good example.
|
On November 23 2010 21:56 Jermstuddog wrote:
The argument that Terrans are behind in late-game macro is so full of holes it's not even funny.
MULEs give Terrans the best econ out there. 1 MULE = 4 drones at 150 cost for the OC and 0 supply. Simple math: You payed 150 minerals for 100 minerals worth of units and 4 SUPPLY FREE WORKERS THAT RESPAWN EVERY 30 SECONDS REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE KILLED!!! Terran has no reason to be behind in econ as you proceed on to late-game.
.
Protoss has 10 probes more most of the time. Zerg 20.
|
On November 23 2010 22:34 Dente wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 21:56 Jermstuddog wrote:
The argument that Terrans are behind in late-game macro is so full of holes it's not even funny.
MULEs give Terrans the best econ out there. 1 MULE = 4 drones at 150 cost for the OC and 0 supply. Simple math: You payed 150 minerals for 100 minerals worth of units and 4 SUPPLY FREE WORKERS THAT RESPAWN EVERY 30 SECONDS REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE KILLED!!! Terran has no reason to be behind in econ as you proceed on to late-game.
. Protoss has 10 probes more most of the time. Zerg 20.
Mules compensate well for that fact, and you can force a zerg into not making drones, you can't do that to a Terran. But anyway, I'm not saying there is an imbalance or anything like that.
|
Seriously, people need to stop fucking corrupting the few words we have to intelligently talk about starcraft!
From liquipedia:
Cheese is a pejorative expression which refers to a strategy that is highly unconventional and designed to take one's opponent by surprise
Emphasis mine. Seriously, nothing about 2 rax is any of that, even when you pull your workers. It's just good against hatch first, pulling your workers is the right way to attack in many one-base all-in situations as scvs are pretty good about buffering marines.
+ Show Spoiler +This also proved true in the all in against NEXgenius in a TvP.
People should get warnings on TL for destroying the language of RTS.
|
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.
|
14 Hatch is an incredibly greedy build. If you decide to do it, there should be a way to punish you for it, just like Protoss or terran would get punished for a 15 command/nexus by zerg. Frankly I am glad, because if this changes the norm of 14 hatch then I wont have to do the same build order every game to punish zerg. If you arent pressuring heavily against 14 hatch he will just smash you with a superior economy. I hope this changes build orders for a later hatchery.
|
On November 23 2010 22:57 Slayer91 wrote:Show nested quote +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.
3 SCVs also cost 150mineral.
|
On November 23 2010 16:46 FataLe wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 16:41 Kraz.Del wrote:
Blizz can't even patch it; the metagame is moving waaaaayyyy too fast. Why patch it? I'm sure Protoss have a far less winrate against the 2 thor rush or the countless variations of the Marine/Banshee/Raven timing push. Those have been around for a while and nothings been done about that. If it's possible to defend without seriously compromising anything after that, it is fine, in blizzards eyes. For example reapers were nerfed because vs Z, Zerg had a hard time defending, yep, but also came out 'behind' after the harass.
Actually reapers were nerfed due to a nigh-unbeatable unitcomposition-based build (speedling/Reapers), and that was also the reason given in an interview regarding that patch.
|
I hope to god that Zergs find a way to defend a FE properly so that Terrans will have to start countering the greed with counter-greed. Macro games FTW!
|
There's nothing new about marine rushing.
The only thing you can consider "new" here is that the BO is getting more refined and the pushes becoming more and more devastating as that refinement happens.
The only thing zergs are asking for is the same thing terrans have always had: A way to keep the other guy from killing me while I get my econ going.
Calling it easy to defend only shows a complete lack of understanding of early-game ZvT.
And 14 hatch is no greedier than 14 OC, stop acting like its an unfair advantage, it barely keeps Zerg in the economic race against 14 OC.
|
On November 23 2010 16:35 DonKey_ wrote:
TBH I don't it's all that strong of an opener at this point zergs know it and they know how to counter it. If they get even the slightest tip off that the terran are doing it they can prepare easily for it.
How do you scout this build? Terran makes a wallin with 1 rax at front - from there it is possible for him to go for this build, and you cant tell it if he denies overlord scouting (assuming overlord can even get there in time - which is impossible on some maps).
Therefore you have to assume he is doing it, and not 14 hatch, which means should he choose to expand or tech you are completely shafted.
Your cut drones (lings) cannot do anything to the wallin - so you completely killed your econ to cover a build that cant be scouted, just in case.
|
Having migrated from T to random I pretty much agree with anyone here saying I would trade CB for mules any day ...
|
its a bit sad terran needs to use workers to punish an early hatch and has a win chance of 50%. But i would just nerf drones hp 30 seems fine, since they build so fast xD. But i guess then terran would abuse worker early even more xD.
Problem with the terran macro is they need to throw out so damn much production buildings late game. I don't really want to compare the costs with a zerg. would be like 1/3 mins and 1/20 gas the zerg needs tech included. Another problem is there is just not enough space.
and since terran late game units are gas heavy crap and zergs prolly ahead in expos means no chance on getting your high tech out. Problem would be reduce gas cost even further and early game would be extremly hard for zerg, being forced to harass the terran.
I think becoming a macro terran would mean saving minerals by reducing the amount of minerals put in defenses, like blocking buildings etc. So you can build non expansion orbitals, since every orbital means you need 5 workers less. With senser towers and a little air fleed you can easily stop any drops nydus etc. While your army pushes slowly forward.
Problem is since supply cost of units is so high compared to bw, you can mostly only defend 1 way. which would mean you would have to block every other way the enemy ground army can take.
I think lost temple and metalopolis would be pretty good for a macro terran. But since terran is considered to be the micro race as it seems (marines just lose to anything without micro, but are evil with micro), playing macro style terran is as tough as playing a micro style zerg.
So i think it will take a while before someone will figure out a nice macro style for terran, just as much as it will take alot of time before zerg players will start to find neat ways to micro.
|
I have never been 14 hatching ZvT. It was always a risky opening.
There are speedling or roach openings that feel pretty safe. Major issue people are having is that 14 hatch is dieing earlyl, which makes sense because it was risky in the first place.
|
On November 23 2010 16:43 b_unnies wrote:
this was done back in GSL Season 2 Finals not exactly "recent"
Dude, that was like a week ago. God people can be nearsighted.
|
TBH i've never found a roach opening vs terran a good idea, i always blindly go lings/banes with using gas on quick tech
|
i've seen lotsa zerg players who actually patrol a drone or a zergling at the bottom of his ramp just in case. easy counter :| haha
|
On November 23 2010 18:29 avilo wrote:
Ok, do you guys really think that out of the blue every top korean Terran just decided that they'd start doing marine/scv all-in variations because it's the "standard thing to do?"
Does anyone remember beta waaaaaaaaay back when? Zerg was the strongest race for a reason in korea. It wasn't because lings were too powerful (ok 1 supply roach but ignore that), it wasn't because they had a magical unit composition that beat everything else...it was because every good Zerg knew that IF they could defend to a certain point in the game, they could power drone 20+ workers ahead of their opponent, stack up larva, suicide their army -> remax -> and basically never lose a macro game late game.
I do not understand how the majority of people here can look so one dimensionally at all of these TvZ games and say, "oh yeah, they're just punishing greedy Zergs that are 14 hatching" or "they just want to win the game fast."
It's more of an underlying problem that all of these pros understand - playing Zerg in a macro game past the 10 minute mark or so is damn tough (if not impossible). As Zerg the goal is always to defend until you are into the macro game, it's very, very difficult to lose ZvT once you reach that point.
So this isn't a necessarily "new trend" at all - it's been in the works since the most recent patch, and finally you're starting to see every top T doing their best to usurp the TvZ lategame difficulties by simply all-inning, semi-allining, or feint-all-ining to gain an advantage or win the game outright.
It really pains me when people are even bashing intotherainbow saying he played terrible, etc etc. or "why the fuck would he do these 'gimmicky' 'all-in' builds." He's doing them because they are right now the best possible shot at winning TvZ series.
Go back over every GSL game and top level TvZ game, as well as other top TvZ games. Do you notice the trend? Terrans usually win around the 10-15 min point (or earlier), or have gained some advantage from an all-in or banshee shinanigans.
Sure, every now and then you see someone play a "macro game" vs zerg, like Nada did, but most of the times Terran has lost those. And the times you do see a TvZ go into a "macro game" the Terran absolutely did something to gain a huge advantage early to be even attempting a management game.
So yeh...what did people really expect Terrans to do? Roll over and die? These mass marine all-ins and variations are the best possible ways to beat Zerg now. Mech is dead because it gives zerg a free 3rd/4th and then they just mass roach/infestor neural you.
This marine stuff is the last stuff possible to take games off of good Zs =/
Amen to this!
|
A zerg needs to have the equivalent of one hatchery (without injects) constantly building drones just to keep up with a CC/Nexus constantly building workers.
That's why Zerg early game is so unstable. In the first 2-3 minutes a zerg will have trouble just matching the Terran's SCV and I'm not even considering MULEs. This is also due to the fact that you sacrifice 4-5 drones early to build hatch/pool/extractor/crawlers. That's 200min worth of workers that won't generate any sort of crucial income early on.
The tricky part is that you absolutely need that 2nd hatch soon in order to 1) not be larvae starved and 2)keep up with the opponent's economy via superior saturation from 2 bases. And when your opponent also FE, you don't have anything significant enough to pressure him, so you lose your advantage.
Edit: I'm not saying 14Hatch is necessary, but you do need an FE and while 14pool/14-16-20 hatch is somewhat easier to defend vs this kind of lame marines+scv all-in, it's harder to defend against later pushes because your crawlers will be late. So the point is that Terran can not only punish you for going 14hatch, but they also will punish you for not doing it. Also there is basically no way for Zerg to know this push is coming because of wall-ins, whereas a Terran can easily know what you're going for by keeping an SCV in your base totally unchallenged until your got your queen and first few lings. Easy for Terran to know if you're going pool or hatch first and react accordingly, while zerg is totally going blind.
|
United States1692 Posts
I'm of the opinion that Zergs shouldn't be able to get away with 14 hatching any more than Protosses or Terrans can get away with 15 Nexus/CC. Its just greedy, and you hardly lose anything with pool first since you'll be able to build your first queen a little earlier.
A zerg needs to have the equivalent of one hatchery (without injects) constantly building drones just to keep up with a CC/Nexus constantly building workers.
False - larvae spawn faster than the build time of probes/SCV's/drones. Larvae every 15 secs, probe every 17 secs.
|
I think its pretty lame.
Considering how zerg need to be 1 base ahead vs T/P i really wouldnt call a zerg FE greedy.
The fact that T can pull all of their scvs and still be economically safe because of MULEs is ridiculous.
Yes i can defend against it but its just annoying.
It just seems that Terran just try to find every little Gimmick they can abuse to win especially early on. TvZ is a fun matchup but all these lame all-innish early game strategies make it stupid.
|
On November 24 2010 00:44 susySquark wrote:I'm of the opinion that Zergs shouldn't be able to get away with 14 hatching any more than Protosses or Terrans can get away with 15 Nexus/CC. Its just greedy, and you hardly lose anything with pool first since you'll be able to build your first queen a little earlier. Show nested quote +A zerg needs to have the equivalent of one hatchery (without injects) constantly building drones just to keep up with a CC/Nexus constantly building workers. False - larvae spawn faster than the build time of probes/SCV's/drones. Larvae every 15 secs, probe every 17 secs.
You forget chronoboost, mule, and overlords.
Despite that, I prefer 13 pool, 16 hatch, but I don't think it makes much difference to defending this push - it's possible it would even be worse, as without creep if the hatch isn't finished, you have no way of defending against marines.
|
Hatch first is not as clutch as it was in BroodWar IMO.
My level of insight isn't all that high level, but hear me out.
A huge reason for getting the fast hatch was that building Hatcheries was the only way of getting creep spread over the chokes. And creep is essential for building static defense in Zerg. And the option of adding static defense in crucial when taking expos; regardless of the race.
If you see your opponent trying to timing-attack you, you want to be able to splash the cash and trow some bunkers/cannons/crawlers(sunkens).
Now that Zerg has Creep tumors, and later ShittingOverlords, taking expos is much easier because you no longer have to wait for the Hatchery to complete to actually build the defense. Imagine how hard it'd be if Terran had to wait for the CC to complete before they could build bunkers around it. Or same thing with Nexus and Cannons.
All in all, I think Zerg may have unexplored potential in slower-hatch openings, and doesn't have to always go for the same I-expand-you-try-to-punish-me metagame.
|
[B]On November 24 2010 00:17 FeyFey wrote:[/B
I think becoming a macro terran would mean saving minerals by reducing the amount of minerals put in defenses, like blocking buildings etc. So you can build non expansion orbitals, since every orbital means you need 5 workers less.
Just some quick math on the OC spam argument.
1 OC costs 550 minerals and grants a mule, which is worth roughly 4 SCVs.
To make the equivalent with supply depots and SCVs, it would cost 400 minerals, you would end up with 1 more available supply and 4 more supply used.
Apply this to late-game TvZ where thors are running rampant and you have a very scary thought indeed.
It costs 150 more minerals initially, but MULEs only last 30 seconds, and that makes them very harass-resistant so long as you don't lose the OC.
Then you think about late-game being constantly supply capped and those 4 supply per OC you saved really start to matter. A push that had 8 thors could now have 11 as well as a few extra SCVs due to your "higher" supply cap.
Holy shit late-game terran sounds awesome if you could actually get 6 OCs up and running.
|
this is a really great push, nothing broken at all with it it's easily defended against the problem however is scouting it... i feel it's really balanced because a 15 hatch needs to be somewhat of a risk and shouldn't be a standard every game as it's really really powerfull after the zerg makes it past the early game...
|
I had a serious itch when the barracks after supply nerf happened because it gave rise to many zergs flat out giving up on early game in TvZ (14 hatch) on almost every map except for Steppes, and even on steppes many still considered it.
Now I don't think build order wins are interesting. However I don't think a hatch first build should be safe on most maps... and if it's safe it should be only because there is such a distance between both players, that both could go very greedy builds if that's what they chose to do.
What match of the GSL is sparking this discussion? If anything Zerg seem to be doing fine so far, if anything we've already seen one major upset.
+ Show Spoiler +Rainbow getting knocked out by a no-picture guy... Liquibet recession number 2!
That being said, I'm not advocating for larger maps... Large maps lead to longer games, but I don't think it's more balanced as a result or that it's more interesting to watch.
|
I think expanding on 14-15 supply without any tech structure should never be 100% safe for any race
|
If its something you do in reaction to something your opponent does it is not cheese by definition. There is nothing wrong in seeing a your opponent overextending himself and exploiting a window opportunity. You should really try it yourself. I predict 14 hatch will need more spine crawlers to defend, delaying the build's economic advantage for a while or become one of those 'mixing it' build like 14 nexus or 14 CC was in Broodwar.
|
On November 24 2010 00:44 susySquark wrote:Show nested quote +A zerg needs to have the equivalent of one hatchery (without injects) constantly building drones just to keep up with a CC/Nexus constantly building workers. False - larvae spawn faster than the build time of probes/SCV's/drones. Larvae every 15 secs, probe every 17 secs.
I think you're playing semantics here.
In theory a non-injected hatchery can make 8drones per 7scvs, but then when you count that you need to burn larvae on overlords, and one for each building you make, it quickly adds-up in the early game.
In the example of a 14pool with ASAP Queen, the first inject will come about 40sec later than a standard 15 OC's mule. By the time the 4 larvae spawn, the MULE already farmed 200mineral. It will take 2 minutes for these 4 drones just to pay for their own cost.
Again, I'm not advocating that 14Hatch should be a norm. But when Zerg take that gamble it's not to be ahead of a Terran, it's just to be able to keep up with him.
|
On November 24 2010 01:06 Alexj wrote:
I think expanding on 14-15 supply without any tech structure should never be 100% safe for any race
Agree. And also agree that its not cheese.
Zerg has no innate right to go 14 hatch without any chance of penalty. T scouts the greedy build and punishes the Z, its a reactive opening.
|
On November 24 2010 01:06 Alexj wrote:
I think expanding on 14-15 supply without any tech structure should never be 100% safe for any race
Well this would be right if Zerg would have a solid 1-base-play too, but they don't.
|
Just how big a difference is it from going 14 hatch to doing something like the 14 Pool/14 Gas for early speedlings (that was standard just a few months ago?) Or expanding behind early Roaches, or something else? And what do Zergs do PvZ (where 14-hatch can get rocked by Zealot/Cannon or 2-Gate)?
There are lots of good Zergs in the tournament yet to play, I suspect someone will have figured it out by the Ro16 or so.
One criticism of Korean players is that they tend to stick to builds for too long, even when it's clear they're not working.
A lot of people have said its hard to scout, I need to point out that in most 2-rax builds Terran cuts the 'standard' 13 Refinery to get his second rax up. Zerg should be able to scout this before the Marine is out. I think Zerg should put down a Baneling nest if he scouts no gas (and delaying Lair is fine, as even with a double gas at 15/16-ish Banshee cloak will be delayed, as well.)
(A no-gas Terran might also be going for a very fast FE, but Baneling nest will punish that, too.)
|
On November 24 2010 00:44 susySquark wrote:I'm of the opinion that Zergs shouldn't be able to get away with 14 hatching any more than Protosses or Terrans can get away with 15 Nexus/CC. Its just greedy, and you hardly lose anything with pool first since you'll be able to build your first queen a little earlier. Show nested quote +A zerg needs to have the equivalent of one hatchery (without injects) constantly building drones just to keep up with a CC/Nexus constantly building workers. False - larvae spawn faster than the build time of probes/SCV's/drones. Larvae every 15 secs, probe every 17 secs.
You also forget that I lose a drone every time I build a building and every 8th larva has to go toward an overlord.
There is no situation that a 1 hatch Zerg is fine in ZvT or ZvP.
|
Maybe blizzard should just make a better map pool with more maps like Shakuras...that would solve a lot of issues.
|
How do you scout this build? Terran makes a wallin with 1 rax at front
You can't wall with just 1 rax and 1 depot.
Seeing the lack of gas shows he is spamming marines.
Your derping drone will easily see a 2nd rax before the marine pops.
|
Going 14 pool/14 gas delays your hatch by quite a long time. Being behind the Terran on income, and having your upgrade for speedlings that is useless if he doesn't attack, is not a good place to be. Ultimately a zerg can't afford to spend money on zerglings and their upgrades if he wants to be even in the economy game.
But yeah, we might start to see blind baneling nests if there is no early gas, and hyper aggression from the zerg if there's a fast expand from terran. It will be interesting!
|
On November 24 2010 01:11 VenerableSpace wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 01:06 Alexj wrote:
I think expanding on 14-15 supply without any tech structure should never be 100% safe for any race Agree. And also agree that its not cheese. Zerg has no innate right to go 14 hatch without any chance of penalty. T scouts the greedy build and punishes the Z, its a reactive opening.
How then doess Zerg punish the greedy 14 OC build?
|
On November 24 2010 01:19 klauz619 wrote:You can't wall with just 1 rax and 1 depot. Seeing the lack of gas shows he is spamming marines. Your derping drone will easily see a 2nd rax before the marine pops.
yes you can, on the low end of the ramp.
|
Sigh....
I know Terran have lot of difficulty pass early game against zerg, but this kind of push are just depressing.
ZvT, in the ( small ) history of Starcraft 2, is all about terran trying to find a new timng push to win instantly again and again and again...
|
I fail to see how 14 gas/pool/20 hatch is safer vs this build. So ya you get speed, earlier maybe you can get bling nest fast, but with no creep or spines or queens at expo it will be just as hard to hold if they hit right before your hatch goes up. Worst of you are taking a gamble if you get 14gas/pool then pump lings and expand at 20 while t make 2 marines and continues as normal you are DONE, you will be so behind it is not even close.
More so i bet you all of the top zerg will go 15 hatch and laugh this build in the face. We have seen it start to happen already. So what that some of the weaker zergs died to this all in? Doesnt make it OP. Every loss i have seen to this so far had GLARING mistakes like having 1 spine 6 lings 2 queens vs 12 rines and 10 scvs, or having spine in the back of your natural where they just ignore it.. i mean for real? IF you not prepared you are going to die weather it is 14 hatch or 14 gas/pool.
|
14 hatch is still viable on most medium-far position games. What we saw in the GSL was terrible defense by the zergs.
However, I do think a way to fix this would be to either decrease spine crawler build time or create an intermediate stage like a creep colony from BW. This would allow the zerg to start static defense buildup as soon as he sees the marines moving out and finish it on time. If most of the zerg players had 2-3 spine crawlers down, they probably could have held off the attacks, as shown by New Dawn. The zerg econ is slightly damaged by building static defense but nowhere near as much as it would have been if they had to blindly put down 3 spine crawlers very early on. This would make it a lot like the BW TvZ dynamic.
|
On November 24 2010 01:22 Jermstuddog wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 01:11 VenerableSpace wrote:On November 24 2010 01:06 Alexj wrote:
I think expanding on 14-15 supply without any tech structure should never be 100% safe for any race Agree. And also agree that its not cheese. Zerg has no innate right to go 14 hatch without any chance of penalty. T scouts the greedy build and punishes the Z, its a reactive opening. How then doess Zerg punish the greedy 14 OC build? There is no 14OC build, and 15OC is not greedy.
|
On November 24 2010 01:34 Enervate wrote:
14 hatch is still viable on most medium-far position games. What we saw in the GSL was terrible defense by the zergs.
However, I do think a way to fix this would be to either decrease spine crawler build time or create an intermediate stage like a creep colony from BW. This would allow the zerg to start static defense buildup as soon as he sees the marines moving out and finish it on time. If most of the zerg players had 2-3 spine crawlers down, they probably could have held off the attacks, as shown by New Dawn. The zerg econ is slightly damaged by building static defense but nowhere near as much as it would have been if they had to blindly put down 3 spine crawlers very early on. This would make it a lot like the BW TvZ dynamic.
except for already way too long discussed conclusion that T late game in sc2 is way weaker than in the former ?
|
On November 24 2010 01:36 Pewt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 01:22 Jermstuddog wrote:On November 24 2010 01:11 VenerableSpace wrote:On November 24 2010 01:06 Alexj wrote:
I think expanding on 14-15 supply without any tech structure should never be 100% safe for any race Agree. And also agree that its not cheese. Zerg has no innate right to go 14 hatch without any chance of penalty. T scouts the greedy build and punishes the Z, its a reactive opening. How then doess Zerg punish the greedy 14 OC build? There is no 14OC build, and 15OC is not greedy.
there should be a 14oc build.
|
On November 24 2010 01:23 Madkipz wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 01:19 klauz619 wrote:How do you scout this build? Terran makes a wallin with 1 rax at front You can't wall with just 1 rax and 1 depot. Seeing the lack of gas shows he is spamming marines. Your derping drone will easily see a 2nd rax before the marine pops. yes you can, on the low end of the ramp.
If he does it on the low ramp then he's practically telling you he's gonna 2rax. Almost no one does that on standard builds.
|
they should patch this imbalanced strat, so terran has to work for wins
|
On November 24 2010 01:39 Madkipz wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 01:36 Pewt wrote:On November 24 2010 01:22 Jermstuddog wrote:On November 24 2010 01:11 VenerableSpace wrote:On November 24 2010 01:06 Alexj wrote:
I think expanding on 14-15 supply without any tech structure should never be 100% safe for any race Agree. And also agree that its not cheese. Zerg has no innate right to go 14 hatch without any chance of penalty. T scouts the greedy build and punishes the Z, its a reactive opening. How then doess Zerg punish the greedy 14 OC build? There is no 14OC build, and 15OC is not greedy. there should be a 14oc build.
There is a 14CC Build...I've played vs it a few times and only one once because terran made a mistake and let my speedlings and blings into his wall at his nat..lol
|
On November 24 2010 01:28 Noocta wrote:
Sigh....
I know Terran have lot of difficulty pass early game against zerg, but this kind of push are just depressing.
ZvT, in the ( small ) history of Starcraft 2, is all about terran trying to find a new timng push to win instantly again and again and again...
As long as T continues as a gain decisive advantage/win early or don't win at all race, that's how it's going to be unfortunately. I can't remember the last time a terran beat an accomplished zerg without doing either of those.
It's almost like playing terran is that kind of game where you have X time to complete all your objectives, you can do a few things here and there to increase the time you have, but when time runs out, game over. Protoss being the "rookie" difficulty level of that game, and Zerg being the "insanity" difficulty.
|
On November 24 2010 01:18 rampaeg wrote:
Maybe blizzard should just make a better map pool with more maps like Shakuras...that would solve a lot of issues.
i honestly think that shakuras isnt longer a zerg favoured map considering terran and protoss semi-FEs that appeared lately
|
The scariest part of this build is that T can poke around the hatch a bit and force lings, meanwhile he is expanding at his base. By the time speed hits and you can reliably get rid of his marines, he's got an expo and bunkers while you are ridiculously behind.
|
this is perfectly beatable with 14 hatch i'm sick of people saying otherwise. People were losing to it because of poor scouting not because of 14 hatch. Remember when yellow got bunker rushed 3 times by boxer? If artosis had been commentating that he wouldve gone "blah blah blah you can't 12 hatch anymore because you can't beat this" yet 12 hatch is the most standard zvt opening ever.
|
Blizzard nerfed zealots, reapers and bunkers saying that it punished zerg FE too hard. I think they should've helped the zerg early game with a more direct approach instead but couldn't figure anything that wouldn't make them OP mid-late game.
IMO they should closely look at things such as decreasing the build time of hatchery(80 sec instead of 100?)/queen(35 sec like OC instead of 50?), their cost, or increasing base larvae generation even slightly.
Then if Terran is considered too weak in mid-game then just help them in this department instead of encouraging them to do these brainless cheeses.
|
On November 24 2010 01:46 Penecks wrote:
The scariest part of this build is that T can poke around the hatch a bit and force lings, meanwhile he is expanding at his base. By the time speed hits and you can reliably get rid of his marines, he's got an expo and bunkers while you are ridiculously behind.
That is the main thing I hate when going up against a build like this. Ok, we all realize that you can't 14 hatch now, but what are you supposed to do when you do a 14 pool/16 hatch and then you scout two barracks at the top of their ramp? It is impossible to tell if theyre building more raxs to do an all in, or if theyre just playing mindgames. It pretty much forces the zerg to get a blind baneling nest every single game vs terran which sucks, and you also have to blindly make 2 spine crawlers and enough lings that you think will hold it off. Then you do this and they end up not even attacking just fast expanding with only 2 rax.. I just feel like there are literally endless amount of options for terran to open with, but zerg is limited to a very few openings and then must scout 24/7 to know whats coming (which is hard to do until you get overseers/overlord speed..
btw im not blaming terrans, if i played their race i would do this every single game vs zerg, it isn't that hard to pull off and seriously messes up the zergs standard gameplan.. now we just need to figure out more viable ways to feel out when to drone vs make lings for the unpredictable scv marine all ins
|
The problem is that Zerg one-base play simply isn't feasible and the same 2(3)-rax push that is such a threat to 14 hatch can be slightly delayed to threaten a 14 pool 15 hatch.
The ZvT dynamic at this point depends mostly on map distance. I look forward to the inclusion of larger maps which may offer more flexibility and diversity to this match-up.
|
On November 24 2010 01:42 fAnTaCy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 01:39 Madkipz wrote:On November 24 2010 01:36 Pewt wrote:On November 24 2010 01:22 Jermstuddog wrote:On November 24 2010 01:11 VenerableSpace wrote:On November 24 2010 01:06 Alexj wrote:
I think expanding on 14-15 supply without any tech structure should never be 100% safe for any race Agree. And also agree that its not cheese. Zerg has no innate right to go 14 hatch without any chance of penalty. T scouts the greedy build and punishes the Z, its a reactive opening. How then doess Zerg punish the greedy 14 OC build? There is no 14OC build, and 15OC is not greedy. there should be a 14oc build. There is a 14CC Build...I've played vs it a few times and only one once because terran made a mistake and let my speedlings and blings into his wall at his nat..lol
You are misunderstanding the 14 OC.
I'm not saying for Terran to expand. I'm saying for him to upgrade his CC to an OC.
If you do it on 14 or 15 it doesn't matter, what matters is that if the zerg player doesn't FE, he'll be extremely far behind economically.
|
They should nerf terran early game and buff terran late game, atm a lot of no skiller terrans are using terran as a crutch because they cant macro at all so they just cheese and say they cant win in late game cuz of terran, not cuz they cant play
|
i havent met it yet on Europe server, for whatevr reason, looks fairly easy to pull. I've seen it on many korean reps though, fast banes should be the answer i guess, though with good marine spread maybe it's not enough
|
I think it is a good strategy but really annoying in how all in it has to be. Terran have to prune Zergs additional bases down to stay in the game, so this seems like a great solution to the problem of Zergs being able to expand relatively safely against Terran. It just looks kind of stupid when you bring all of your SCVs along and just go for the win right there. I'd rather they figured out a number of SCVs to bring that would allow Terrans to kill off the expo and give the Terrans a chance to stay in the game long term.
Zerg's 2 base play is really strong and I think if Terran can't punish a fast expand they have a very poor chance of winning the game, even if they FE as well.
|
On November 24 2010 01:54 Jermstuddog wrote:
If you do it on 14 or 15 it doesn't matter, what matters is that if the zerg player doesn't FE, he'll be extremely far behind economically.
Not true, only slightly behind until you get the 2nd hatch up safely.
|
I really don't like the way it's been going. It seems like most the Terran players are so afraid to enter a macro game against Zerg (perhaps rightfully so? I don't want to make it about balance) that they are willing to do these ridiculous aggressive pushes with their SCVs. It's not exciting when it happens every match. It just means short, one sided games.
|
stupid question:
Why don't Roaches beat that? Are the Terrans just getting Marauders or what?
|
On November 24 2010 01:28 Noocta wrote:
Sigh....
I know Terran have lot of difficulty pass early game against zerg, but this kind of push are just depressing.
ZvT, in the ( small ) history of Starcraft 2, is all about terran trying to find a new timng push to win instantly again and again and again...
but isn't that what SC2 is all about..catching your opponent with his pants down. I feel like most of T vZ/P is about timing pushes when detection (banshee) or colossus is not ready. Before that included reapers..now not so much. It seems like T in this thread expects insta-win, if not QQing ensues. The funny thing is that for Z and P this is rarely the case (outside of the baneling busts, which are far less popular now). P has no insta-win timing push..that I've seen anyways (VRs nerfed)
|
this complaining makes no sense, when zergs were going for extaractor first there were doing alrightish, until 7 rax reaper came out, so repears were nerfed, roaches were buffed and extarctor first was not necesary anymore, zerg felt safe to hatch first, turns out it's not safe, okay, just go back to the drawing board and come up with safe builds. maybe extractor first is not a dead idea yet.
|
On November 24 2010 02:02 Velr wrote:
stupid question:
Why don't Roaches beat that? Are the Terrans just getting Marauders or what?
once the terran has 4 marines per roach, the mighty roach begins to suck in direct confrontations.
|
i think this is how SC2 has evolved since release.
first terran had 5rax reaper, hellions that could kite all zerg T1 units, etc, to kill or indefinitely cripple the zerg before the 10 minute mark.
then the patch came out, nerfed the reaper, buffed the roach, made it so zerg had a fighting chance if not even became the favorite in the matchup
and now, either due to most terrans being unskilled/uncreative/simply lazy, or simply not feeling that they can win a macro game against zerg (which may honestly be the case, but this signals a much deeper balance problem in the game) they have come up with this, a new way to kill or cripple the zerg before the 10 minute mark.
this will go on until terran's feel that they can win a macro game against the zerg, or blizzard decides to make balance changes.
|
On November 24 2010 02:10 AnAngryDingo wrote:
and now, either due to most terrans being unskilled/uncreative/simply lazy, or simply not feeling that they can win a macro game against zerg (which may honestly be the case, but this signals a much deeper balance problem in the game) they have come up with this, a new way to kill or cripple the zerg before the 10 minute mark. I'm more concerned that someone like RainBow feels that he needs to use what is basically a coinflip strategy against a no-name Zerg to win. Time will tell I guess. Also, we see many of the same players macro really well in TvT and decently in TvP (TvP is sort of halfway between TvZ and TvT right now) so I wouldn't say it's because players simply are bad at macro or anything. Obviously there are some awful players as well.
|
So - Foxer used a similiar build which Nestea was able to hold of. That was ~1week ago.
The zerg players say that the build from Foxer was unrefined (/badly executed).
So that means the zerg players werent able to find a solution in 1 week to a strong build?
Where's the problem with that?
And just think about it - imagine you're a top Zerg competing in the GSL but havent played yet. You found a way to easily block the mentioned Terran strategy thanks to the help of you teammates.
Why would you go around and tell everyone? So your Terran opponent in GSL doesnt do it, because he knows you're able to hold it off?
Imho it's way to early to cry "imbalance" "patch needed". When nothing has changed in a month I would start considering that there really is a problem.
|
On November 23 2010 16:27 sqrt wrote:
The problem may be that Zerg on two bases is strong as hell, especially after saturation. No matter how good you are, you do not want to go into a macro game with Zerg, too risky. However I believe that this will be the bane of T in GSL 3, Zerg's will know how to crack this thing by the Ro 16 with little to no problem.
Yes, but the same can be true for the other two races on two bases (in fact, moreso). A two base T or P still has a slight advantage over a two base Z. Granted, lair tech and 2-base gives the Zerg tools to obtain map control to secure a 3rd (sometimes), but well-timed aggression from either races can stymie that.
I think the real issue at hand is why Terran early all-in aggression is becoming so prevalent vZ and vP. It's starting to make it seem like Terrans are getting desperate or have no confidence in a long game with Protoss and Zerg.
|
If you scout a 15 CC build you can easily outmacro him and get a third base. people don't seem to get this, zergs economy grows a lot faster than terran, since their scv production is limited and mules aren't quite so great as everybody says.
i can't believe I'm trying to argue in favour of terran. People sure overreact a lot. 1 week ago it was all about how ridiculously impossible it was to win zvt because of zergs imba macro mechanic. Now terrans imba macro mechanic makes it impossible for zerg to win.
1 base zerg doesn't work like in BW. You still need 2 hatcheries to produce as much as you want and not having an expansion slows your economy a lot so you're left with allin builds.
|
On November 24 2010 01:43 Asshat wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 01:28 Noocta wrote:
Sigh....
I know Terran have lot of difficulty pass early game against zerg, but this kind of push are just depressing.
ZvT, in the ( small ) history of Starcraft 2, is all about terran trying to find a new timng push to win instantly again and again and again... As long as T continues as a gain decisive advantage/win early or don't win at all race, that's how it's going to be unfortunately. I can't remember the last time a terran beat an accomplished zerg without doing either of those. It's almost like playing terran is that kind of game where you have X time to complete all your objectives, you can do a few things here and there to increase the time you have, but when time runs out, game over. Protoss being the "rookie" difficulty level of that game, and Zerg being the "insanity" difficulty.
Looking through your post history I am unable to find a single post that is not a completely exaggerated whine. Do you ever say anything positive or do anything but complain in your day to day life?
|
Why is it P and T are now complaining about Zerg late-game strength when it hasn't been buffed in the last 6 patches? In fact, the Ultralisk splash nerf made the late-game worse. T and P's beat Zerg late-game time and time again. The only thing that was buffed was Roaches getting +1 range. That's it. And now suddenly late-game Zerg is impossible to beat?
Bullshit. Terran had training wheels when playing Zergs, and now that they are off, they can't get easy wins anymore. A 200/200 Terran army can't be beat by a Zerg 200/200 army, and is hardly even dented. Terran players won tournaments left and right for months after release, and now you're telling me after the game's most counter-able unit got 1 extra range, the race is now impossible to beat?
That's just fucking embarrassing. I don't see any pros complaining. It's only the lonely nobodies who can't get to the top of Gold League.
|
I've been trying to think of a possible reaction to the SCV/Marine All-in for a while, and I at least have the start of one.
The strength of the build is having the MULE, for sure, but also is in that the Terran user is able to constantly build marines out of the barracks that have already been built with the economy remaining (MULEs and a few SCVs). In addition, the prospect of having the larger natural to protect is difficult.
So, let's imagine the following scenario (which is Liquid'Haypro v. BitbybitPrime.we), where there are about 12 SCVs and 10 Marines (with more being rallied), and Terran has enough economy to support 4 rax. Haypro at this point had about 30 drones, 2 hatch, 2 queen, 1 spine crawler and ~10ish zerglings on the way. As we saw in the matchup last night, Bitbybit cleaned house.
Here is what I think a possible reaction could be. After the 14 hatch, get the spawning pool as quickly as possible. By this time, you should have scouted and should know if there is an all-in coming. Instead of getting more drones and an extra queen, throw down 2-3 spine crawlers in your main. Mass produce zerglings with your larvae, not drones.
Now here is the key moment, especially on maps with a small choke into the natural. You need to be sure to scout when Terran is moving out, and at that moment move your zerglings out to pass by them without attacking (along an alternate path). Kill their remaining SCVs, MULEs, and stop reinforcements from the 4 rax. They, of course, will destroy your natural, but simply pull all your drones back to your main. Now, when he moves into your main, not only is his base being demolished, but you have 2-3 spine crawlers, ~25 drones, and as many zerglings as you could scare up since you sent your main force out. All you have to do is make sure your hatch doesnt fall, and you will be in good shape.
So I know this idea is a bit unrefined, but I believe that it could work as an appropriate response, as it both has a way of denying MULE usage and also you get the benefit of not having to defend two bases. Please give feedback, from both sides of the fence.
|
On November 24 2010 02:32 AlphaFerg wrote:
I've been trying to think of a possible reaction to the SCV/Marine All-in for a while, and I at least have the start of one.
The strength of the build is having the MULE, for sure, but also is in that the Terran user is able to constantly build marines out of the barracks that have already been built with the economy remaining (MULEs and a few SCVs). In addition, the prospect of having the larger natural to protect is difficult.
So, let's imagine the following scenario (which is Liquid'Haypro v. BitbybitPrime.we), where there are about 12 SCVs and 10 Marines (with more being rallied), and Terran has enough economy to support 4 rax. Haypro at this point had about 30 drones, 2 hatch, 2 queen, 1 spine crawler and ~10ish zerglings on the way. As we saw in the matchup last night, Bitbybit cleaned house.
Here is what I think a possible reaction could be. After the 14 hatch, get the spawning pool as quickly as possible. By this time, you should have scouted and should know if there is an all-in coming. Instead of getting more drones and an extra queen, throw down 2-3 spine crawlers in your main. Mass produce zerglings with your larvae, not drones.
Now here is the key moment, especially on maps with a small choke into the natural. You need to be sure to scout when Terran is moving out, and at that moment move your zerglings out to pass by them without attacking (along an alternate path). Kill their remaining SCVs, MULEs, and stop reinforcements from the 4 rax. They, of course, will destroy your natural, but simply pull all your drones back to your main. Now, when he moves into your main, not only is his base being demolished, but you have 2-3 spine crawlers, ~25 drones, and as many zerglings as you could scare up since you sent your main force out. All you have to do is make sure your hatch doesnt fall, and you will be in good shape.
So I know this idea is a bit unrefined, but I believe that it could work as an appropriate response, as it both has a way of denying MULE usage and also you get the benefit of not having to defend two bases. Please give feedback, from both sides of the fence.
The whole point is that the terran will SCAN before moving out, if you got 3 spines and a ton of zerglings, they simply sit in their base and macro up.
As a zerg, you cannot scout if they are doing an all in or not, simply by having 2 barracks in the wall.
|
On November 24 2010 02:39 Fa1nT wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 02:32 AlphaFerg wrote:
I've been trying to think of a possible reaction to the SCV/Marine All-in for a while, and I at least have the start of one.
The strength of the build is having the MULE, for sure, but also is in that the Terran user is able to constantly build marines out of the barracks that have already been built with the economy remaining (MULEs and a few SCVs). In addition, the prospect of having the larger natural to protect is difficult.
So, let's imagine the following scenario (which is Liquid'Haypro v. BitbybitPrime.we), where there are about 12 SCVs and 10 Marines (with more being rallied), and Terran has enough economy to support 4 rax. Haypro at this point had about 30 drones, 2 hatch, 2 queen, 1 spine crawler and ~10ish zerglings on the way. As we saw in the matchup last night, Bitbybit cleaned house.
Here is what I think a possible reaction could be. After the 14 hatch, get the spawning pool as quickly as possible. By this time, you should have scouted and should know if there is an all-in coming. Instead of getting more drones and an extra queen, throw down 2-3 spine crawlers in your main. Mass produce zerglings with your larvae, not drones.
Now here is the key moment, especially on maps with a small choke into the natural. You need to be sure to scout when Terran is moving out, and at that moment move your zerglings out to pass by them without attacking (along an alternate path). Kill their remaining SCVs, MULEs, and stop reinforcements from the 4 rax. They, of course, will destroy your natural, but simply pull all your drones back to your main. Now, when he moves into your main, not only is his base being demolished, but you have 2-3 spine crawlers, ~25 drones, and as many zerglings as you could scare up since you sent your main force out. All you have to do is make sure your hatch doesnt fall, and you will be in good shape.
So I know this idea is a bit unrefined, but I believe that it could work as an appropriate response, as it both has a way of denying MULE usage and also you get the benefit of not having to defend two bases. Please give feedback, from both sides of the fence. The whole point is that the terran will SCAN before moving out, if you got 3 spines and a ton of zerglings, they simply sit in their base and macro up. As a zerg, you cannot scout if they are doing an all in or not, simply by having 2 barracks in the wall.
Exactly this. A lot of terrans on ladder just blindly commit to the all-in, but the smart way to do this is to scan. You lose one mule and had to cut 1-2 SCVs, but if the Zerg prepared, then he cut 10+ drones. That's enough to enter the midgame with a very large advantage.
|
On November 24 2010 02:32 Grimjim wrote:
Why is it P and T are now complaining about Zerg late-game strength when it hasn't been buffed in the last 6 patches? In fact, the Ultralisk splash nerf made the late-game worse. T and P's beat Zerg late-game time and time again. The only thing that was buffed was Roaches getting +1 range. That's it. And now suddenly late-game Zerg is impossible to beat?
Bullshit. Terran had training wheels when playing Zergs, and now that they are off, they can't get easy wins anymore. A 200/200 Terran army can't be beat by a Zerg 200/200 army, and is hardly even dented. Terran players won tournaments left and right for months after release, and now you're telling me after the game's most counter-able unit got 1 extra range, the race is now impossible to beat?
That's just fucking embarrassing. I don't see any pros complaining. It's only the lonely nobodies who can't get to the top of Gold League.
Terra and Toss got nerved tho... which is basicly the same as buffing Zerg. Also how can you say that Zerg late game has not been buffed when Roach range +1 made them almost twice as good as they were before. Now more roaches can attack a target at once, they can attack over forcefields and supply depots and hit'n'move is even more effektiv.
|
On November 24 2010 02:32 Grimjim wrote:
Why is it P and T are now complaining about Zerg late-game strength when it hasn't been buffed in the last 6 patches? In fact, the Ultralisk splash nerf made the late-game worse. T and P's beat Zerg late-game time and time again. The only thing that was buffed was Roaches getting +1 range. That's it. And now suddenly late-game Zerg is impossible to beat?
Bullshit. Terran had training wheels when playing Zergs, and now that they are off, they can't get easy wins anymore. A 200/200 Terran army can't be beat by a Zerg 200/200 army, and is hardly even dented. Terran players won tournaments left and right for months after release, and now you're telling me after the game's most counter-able unit got 1 extra range, the race is now impossible to beat?
That's just fucking embarrassing. I don't see any pros complaining. It's only the lonely nobodies who can't get to the top of Gold League.
Sorry, but you are either completly blind or I dont know. Of course its not because of buffing Zerg late game. Its because of all those little nerfs to Terran and Protoss that made it so easy for Zerg to 14 hatch or do any kind of fast expand without losing any significant number of drones. And because of this safe economic opening their late game is so scary.. It was always scary, but with all those reaper abuse, Zealot being a threat etc., no one actually saw how brutal is Zerg fully saturated on 3-4 bases being able to tech switch at will..
|
On November 24 2010 02:39 Fa1nT wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 02:32 AlphaFerg wrote:
I've been trying to think of a possible reaction to the SCV/Marine All-in for a while, and I at least have the start of one.
The strength of the build is having the MULE, for sure, but also is in that the Terran user is able to constantly build marines out of the barracks that have already been built with the economy remaining (MULEs and a few SCVs). In addition, the prospect of having the larger natural to protect is difficult.
So, let's imagine the following scenario (which is Liquid'Haypro v. BitbybitPrime.we), where there are about 12 SCVs and 10 Marines (with more being rallied), and Terran has enough economy to support 4 rax. Haypro at this point had about 30 drones, 2 hatch, 2 queen, 1 spine crawler and ~10ish zerglings on the way. As we saw in the matchup last night, Bitbybit cleaned house.
Here is what I think a possible reaction could be. After the 14 hatch, get the spawning pool as quickly as possible. By this time, you should have scouted and should know if there is an all-in coming. Instead of getting more drones and an extra queen, throw down 2-3 spine crawlers in your main. Mass produce zerglings with your larvae, not drones.
Now here is the key moment, especially on maps with a small choke into the natural. You need to be sure to scout when Terran is moving out, and at that moment move your zerglings out to pass by them without attacking (along an alternate path). Kill their remaining SCVs, MULEs, and stop reinforcements from the 4 rax. They, of course, will destroy your natural, but simply pull all your drones back to your main. Now, when he moves into your main, not only is his base being demolished, but you have 2-3 spine crawlers, ~25 drones, and as many zerglings as you could scare up since you sent your main force out. All you have to do is make sure your hatch doesnt fall, and you will be in good shape.
So I know this idea is a bit unrefined, but I believe that it could work as an appropriate response, as it both has a way of denying MULE usage and also you get the benefit of not having to defend two bases. Please give feedback, from both sides of the fence. The whole point is that the terran will SCAN before moving out, if you got 3 spines and a ton of zerglings, they simply sit in their base and macro up. As a zerg, you cannot scout if they are doing an all in or not, simply by having 2 barracks in the wall.
If i see 2 rax opening, i will have at VERY least 1 spine up. If i see a scan i will put 1-2 more down instantly since he just spent 300. If he doens't move out i have 2 "free" spines. Also the answer you posted had spines started after terran moves out and in his main so no they aren't scanable.
|
On November 24 2010 01:18 rampaeg wrote:
Maybe blizzard should just make a better map pool with more maps like Shakuras...that would solve a lot of issues.
YEAH GUY! Would you also suggest we use scrap station multiple times in ZvT series? That'd be just splendid.
|
If Terrans felt more confident mid-to-late game this wouldn't happen as its risky. Must be something wrong with the match up when all T's feel that desperate.
|
On November 24 2010 02:42 fdsdfg wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 02:39 Fa1nT wrote:On November 24 2010 02:32 AlphaFerg wrote:
I've been trying to think of a possible reaction to the SCV/Marine All-in for a while, and I at least have the start of one.
The strength of the build is having the MULE, for sure, but also is in that the Terran user is able to constantly build marines out of the barracks that have already been built with the economy remaining (MULEs and a few SCVs). In addition, the prospect of having the larger natural to protect is difficult.
So, let's imagine the following scenario (which is Liquid'Haypro v. BitbybitPrime.we), where there are about 12 SCVs and 10 Marines (with more being rallied), and Terran has enough economy to support 4 rax. Haypro at this point had about 30 drones, 2 hatch, 2 queen, 1 spine crawler and ~10ish zerglings on the way. As we saw in the matchup last night, Bitbybit cleaned house.
Here is what I think a possible reaction could be. After the 14 hatch, get the spawning pool as quickly as possible. By this time, you should have scouted and should know if there is an all-in coming. Instead of getting more drones and an extra queen, throw down 2-3 spine crawlers in your main. Mass produce zerglings with your larvae, not drones.
Now here is the key moment, especially on maps with a small choke into the natural. You need to be sure to scout when Terran is moving out, and at that moment move your zerglings out to pass by them without attacking (along an alternate path). Kill their remaining SCVs, MULEs, and stop reinforcements from the 4 rax. They, of course, will destroy your natural, but simply pull all your drones back to your main. Now, when he moves into your main, not only is his base being demolished, but you have 2-3 spine crawlers, ~25 drones, and as many zerglings as you could scare up since you sent your main force out. All you have to do is make sure your hatch doesnt fall, and you will be in good shape.
So I know this idea is a bit unrefined, but I believe that it could work as an appropriate response, as it both has a way of denying MULE usage and also you get the benefit of not having to defend two bases. Please give feedback, from both sides of the fence. The whole point is that the terran will SCAN before moving out, if you got 3 spines and a ton of zerglings, they simply sit in their base and macro up. As a zerg, you cannot scout if they are doing an all in or not, simply by having 2 barracks in the wall. Exactly this. A lot of terrans on ladder just blindly commit to the all-in, but the smart way to do this is to scan. You lose one mule and had to cut 1-2 SCVs, but if the Zerg prepared, then he cut 10+ drones. That's enough to enter the midgame with a very large advantage.
Huge exaggeration. It takes 2 spines and 4 roaches to be fairly safe at the moment of moving out for t, since you can realistically make another 5roaches/10 lings. That is hardly cutting 10 drones. As it stands right now zerg HAS to get something to fight helions/4-5 marine pushes as it is. usualy 3-4 roaches or spine + lings. Well if you see 2 rax make 2 spines, at very least you are still dead even 150 for rax vs 150 for spine.
|
On November 24 2010 02:10 AnAngryDingo wrote:
i think this is how SC2 has evolved since release.
first terran had 5rax reaper, hellions that could kite all zerg T1 units, etc, to kill or indefinitely cripple the zerg before the 10 minute mark.
then the patch came out, nerfed the reaper, buffed the roach, made it so zerg had a fighting chance if not even became the favorite in the matchup
and now, either due to most terrans being unskilled/uncreative/simply lazy, or simply not feeling that they can win a macro game against zerg (which may honestly be the case, but this signals a much deeper balance problem in the game) they have come up with this, a new way to kill or cripple the zerg before the 10 minute mark.
this will go on until terran's feel that they can win a macro game against the zerg, or blizzard decides to make balance changes.
I just don't get this kind of thinking. Seriously?! Terran have come up with this kind of strategies because they have identified a weakness in hatch first, not because they are bad or whatever you want to think.
I don't like to discuss balance at all, but this kind of thinking some Zerg players have is seriously pissing me off.
If a terran Wins, its because their overpowered piece of s*** race or because they cheesed because they are unskilled. Nope, the Zerg player was never outplayed, how dare someone say that! Its those 1 APM abusive terrans the ones who suck.
If a Zerg wins, its because he was just too good. The race is still UP but since the Zerg player is so skilled that against all odss he managed to beat the OP 1 APM Terran player.
Really this attitude some people have is seriously infuriating. A player loses or wins the game not his race. It also kinda angers me how people are now saying that 14 Hath is necessary for them to have a chance, seriously? Did all that time before the reaper nerf does not count?
People should start playing the game and stop playing balance police
|
On November 24 2010 02:39 Fa1nT wrote:
The whole point is that the terran will SCAN before moving out, if you got 3 spines and a ton of zerglings, they simply sit in their base and macro up.
How many times do people have to repeat it? Terran CAN'T macro up against zerg! The zerg will see that the terran is not coming. Response: baneling nest + 3th base and drone drone drone drone.
|
Well, as far as GSL3 goes, we haven't seen a "REALLY GOOD" Zerg players losing to this build yet. So, I'm gonna have to wait and see what Kyrix and Check has to say about this (since they are facing Terrans in Ro64) until I can agree with the side that "it's impossible for Zerg to stop this" argument.
|
On November 24 2010 02:55 Dente wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 02:39 Fa1nT wrote:
The whole point is that the terran will SCAN before moving out, if you got 3 spines and a ton of zerglings, they simply sit in their base and macro up.
How many times do people have to repeat it? Terran CAN'T macro up against zerg! The zerg will see that the terran is not coming. Response: baneling nest + 3th base and drone drone drone drone.
thanks for trying bronze leaguer :p but zerg cant make every building and tech at once
|
On November 24 2010 03:02 Coolcatqt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 02:55 Dente wrote:On November 24 2010 02:39 Fa1nT wrote:
The whole point is that the terran will SCAN before moving out, if you got 3 spines and a ton of zerglings, they simply sit in their base and macro up.
How many times do people have to repeat it? Terran CAN'T macro up against zerg! The zerg will see that the terran is not coming. Response: baneling nest + 3th base and drone drone drone drone. thanks for trying bronze leaguer :p but zerg cant make every building and tech at once
Doubt he is bronze leaguer if a person know that zerg need to drone drone drone he is at very least low diamond imho...
|
On November 24 2010 03:02 Coolcatqt wrote:
thanks for trying bronze leaguer :p but zerg cant make every building and tech at once
I'm not a bronze leaguer (2200+ diamond). The terrans doing this build are on 1 base. The zergs are on 2 base. 3 spinecrawlers + lings --> some guy (I responded to him) said that the terran will scan and will not attack (+ macro up, LOL). Result: zerg on 2 base, terran on 1 base. Terran can keep on playing on 1 base but if the terran takes his natural, then there is a small window for the zerg to drone drone drone + expand.
There is a reason why top korean terrans are doing these kind of builds. I'm saying this for a very long time: a good zerg is not beatable without these kind of "allinstuff". The only reason why terrans were winning before the patch was because of very strong harass. With the roach range changed (bye hellion rush) and the reaper heavy nerfed, the only other harass options are banshees (you die vs a good zerg that builds 3 queens) and hellion drop (good placed overlords and your drop will fail).
|
On November 24 2010 02:13 Pewt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 02:10 AnAngryDingo wrote:
and now, either due to most terrans being unskilled/uncreative/simply lazy, or simply not feeling that they can win a macro game against zerg (which may honestly be the case, but this signals a much deeper balance problem in the game) they have come up with this, a new way to kill or cripple the zerg before the 10 minute mark. I'm more concerned that someone like RainBow feels that he needs to use what is basically a coinflip strategy against a no-name Zerg to win. Time will tell I guess. Also, we see many of the same players macro really well in TvT and decently in TvP (TvP is sort of halfway between TvZ and TvT right now) so I wouldn't say it's because players simply are bad at macro or anything. Obviously there are some awful players as well.
Exactly! Why should someone with the skill level of him feel the need to do this to a no-name Zerg? Round of 64 has been extremely boring to watch, the TvZs that is. The blind baneling nest doesn't sound like a bad idea against T. "it slows down my lair". QQ more. P blindly opens robo to not lose to flying DT's delaying our Charge and Templar tech. Why shouldn't y'all (the Zergs) have to do the same?
|
I don't see why people recommend banelings, when while certainly obtainable faster, they aren't as effective as speedlings except against SCVs. With a player with good micro, they can split their marines and scv up, leaving the zerg a hell of a time with their banes. I am just supposing this that scenario though, and haven't seen all GSL games - does someone go banelings vs it or something? Other high level games with baneling vs marine-scv rush?
Personally I scout with 10th drone, and with that, I can see when they are scouting, and what they are building quite easily in time to figure if hatch first is a good option or not. People are just cutting corners by not scouting, which certainly can give a benefit, but it can cost huge problems also.
I consider the + Show Spoiler + to be a good example of how a later scout can really be very detrimental (although maybe he thought he could hold 14 hatch regardless of the opponent build)
|
...
"Terran can't macro up against Zerg!!!!!" versus "Zerg can't defend or they're a BAJILLION behind!!!!"
QQ cage match.
Seriously, Zerg, if you fast expand against a rush build, plant some fucking statics and then power. When Protoss players FE, they don't bitch about needing Photon Cannons...
And Terran whiners, perhaps if you didn't camp until Zerg is two bases ahead and used your damn overpowered buildings on the battlefield (Planetary Fortress, Bunker, flying raxes aka the 150 mineral permanent mobile Terran force field) you'd have an easier time in a macro game...
|
On November 24 2010 03:15 Xapti wrote:I don't see why people recommend banelings, when while certainly obtainable faster, they aren't as effective as speedlings except against SCVs. With a player with good micro, they can split their marines and scv up, leaving the zerg a hell of a time with their banes. I am just supposing this that scenario though, and haven't seen all GSL games - does someone go banelings vs it or something? Other high level games with baneling vs marine-scv rush? Personally I scout with 10th drone, and with that, I can see when they are scouting, and what they are building quite easily in time to figure if hatch first is a good option or not. People are just cutting corners by not scouting, which certainly can give a benefit, but it can cost huge problems also. I consider the + Show Spoiler + to be a good example of how a later scout can really be very detrimental (although maybe he thought he could hold 14 hatch regardless of the opponent build) RainbOw's opponent used banelings and + Show Spoiler +absolutely demolished RainbOw. Marine micro isn't very good against creep banes if they don't have stim, which this push doesn't. More importantly, if the banes kill the SCVs then this push will fail regardless.
edit: I should clarify that the banelings don't stop the initial poke unless it comes later circa HayprO game 1, spines do. Banelings just stop the all in that T has basically committed to by the point that they are Marine/SCV poking.
|
~2000 diamond, and this build has been basically every ZvT I've played the past few days.
I think you need to go 14 pool/15-18 hatch in every game against T, and blindly build a baneling nest if you scout 2 rax. While building a baneling nest early hurts your eco if they don't rush, it's better than blindly spamming lings IMO. Banelings are so important to stopping this build, since they efficiently give you the lead, other builds can possibly stop it but end up costing you too much. You can sit at your base with one spine crawler and 6 lings, and once your scouting ling sees the push you can just turn those lings in your base into banes and make more lings. The baneling creation time is fast enough to make this pretty easy. The only problem is that you will need to have stockpiled a little gas in order to do this.
The transition from 2rax into banshee shoudn't be too much of a problem if you scout well. The sneaky 2rax->14CC transition is clever, but you should be able to catch up economically just by powering drones.
|
I think 14 hatch will still be viable in a few weeks if not less than that. If you see no gas and no expansion it's pretty obvious they are committed to this completely all-in attack. Even if you don't see an expansion you can pretty safely assume they are doing this build if you see no gas (at least right now since it's all the rage). All you have to do is stop it and you win, and there are definitely ways to stop this build. I'd say before GSL3 is over Zerg will be stopping this build pretty much every time.
|
I guess things like these are easier than improving your overall game (I really don't buy the whole "it's necessary" thing, Zerg is not dominating as hard as people are suggesting). Personally I expand slightly later anyways, I consider it a flaw in my play which needs to be fixed, but it certainly helps when running into these. As such I don't mind much, though I do hope SC2 will move past the whole "must end it in 10 minutes using the flavor of the month build" thing soon, because.. well it's kind of boring.
|
On November 24 2010 03:32 trias_e wrote:
~2000 diamond, and this build has been basically every ZvT I've played the past few days.
I think you need to go 14 pool/15-18 hatch in every game against T, and blindly build a baneling nest if you scout 2 rax. While building a baneling nest early hurts your eco if they don't rush, it's better than blindly spamming lings IMO. Banelings are so important to stopping this build, since they efficiently give you the lead, other builds can possibly stop it but end up costing you too much. You can sit at your base with one spine crawler and 6 lings, and once your scouting ling sees the push you can just turn those lings in your base into banes and make more lings. The baneling creation time is fast enough to make this pretty easy. The only problem is that you will need to have stockpiled a little gas in order to do this.
The transition from 2rax into banshee shoudn't be too much of a problem if you scout well. The sneaky 2rax->14CC transition is clever, but you should be able to catch up economically just by powering drones.
The bling nest will hurt in the beginning but at least it is not wasted. You will probably build a baneling nest in every ZvT at some point and although it hurts your economy early it's not a complete waste after the 5 minute mark.
|
HayprO played it wrong because he didn't constantly scout. The trouble with facing the 2 barracks opening on BS is that they can easily move those 2 barracks into the choke on the right of the their natural expo, so you have no idea if they're going to pressure or expo you if you're not scouting.
You don't go banelings because if they pressure you early instead of that later push which bitbybit did, you're going ot be 150 minerals down. You just need to play adapt to the situation and play it as if it's a 4gate, just a lot earlier/later.
|
It wasn't that long ago that a lot of people thought that Zergs could FE for free and there was nothing Terrans could do about it and how boring that was etc. With no patch assist, Terran pros figured something out.
As much success as Terrans are having punishing Zerg FE's in the 1st round of the GSL I've also seen Zergs hold it off and win. I'm confident they'll figure it out. The strategic back-and-forth is far from boring to me. The history of any sport is full of this kind of stuff and it's really interesting.
|
On November 24 2010 03:43 eatpraylove wrote:
It wasn't that long ago that a lot of people thought that Zergs could FE for free and there was nothing Terrans could do about it and how boring that was etc. With no patch assist, Terran pros figured something out.
As much success as Terrans are having punishing Zerg FE's in the 1st round of the GSL I've also seen Zergs hold it off and win. I'm confident they'll figure it out. The strategic back-and-forth is far from boring to me. The history of any sport is full of this kind of stuff and it's really interesting.
What are you talking about? You mean where Zerg FEd and suddenly there were like 50 reapers in their base? Oh, you mean the time, where there was nothing like Supply -> Rax where fast expanding Zergs often found like 7 raxes floating over their base.. Now I get it.
|
It's pretty scary that ZvT evolves in short,boring link.
Terran finds great all-in->New strats weaken the all-in,but are not 100% proof->Patch comes out->Macro games again happen->Terran finds great all-in
This looks like Terrans infest planets,takeover the living creatures and use them in their army,while Zerg thrives in huge cities made out of skyscrapers.
It should be like
Macro games->Zerg/Terran finds new exciting strat->Macro games are full of improvisation and emotion->Terran/Zerg finds the counter->Macro games with less bland game play->Go again like this for three times->ZvT is great matchup->Expansion comes out-> Yeah You guessed right. Macro games.
|
On November 23 2010 17:36 busdriver wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 17:25 Epoch wrote:
14 hatch is nonsense and I'm glad terrans found ways to punish it. For a while all zergs were doing is 14 hatch, being completely safe, make like 2 zerglings a million drones. Hatch zlings and banelings when terran pushes out, because they have to push or they will lose, as it is their responsibility to be the aggressor since their late game sucks. And then BAM, wipe your entire army if u make 1 micro mistake. Once that first armies gone its game over. Now that was lame.
Now zergs have to maybe make a spawning pool first occasionally, and when they make that spawning pool they need to produce units for defense. Sounds good 2 me. I know the races are different, but as protoss if I were to Nexus before gateway or forge I'd get rolfstomped everytime. If I see a terran CC go down at 15 I immediately send my first few units to force it to at least lift off.
The only difference is Toss and Terran can last for-fucking-ever on one base, zerg absolutely can not be on even bases.
|
I can definetely say i don't like the direction ZvT is heading. I just got 2 rax rushed with 4 scvs pulled, bunker rushed, and then switched into 2 port cloaked banshees.
All in the same game. -_-
|
i think the key to terrans "mass marine sprinkle of tank" style of play is going to be burrowed banelings and baneling speed after lair is done comboed by mass mass creep spread.
|
On November 24 2010 03:32 schimmetje wrote:
I guess things like these are easier than improving your overall game (I really don't buy the whole "it's necessary" thing, Zerg is not dominating as hard as people are suggesting). Personally I expand slightly later anyways, I consider it a flaw in my play which needs to be fixed, but it certainly helps when running into these. As such I don't mind much, though I do hope SC2 will move past the whole "must end it in 10 minutes using the flavor of the month build" thing soon, because.. well it's kind of boring. I would buy this if it were just nobodies doing these builds, but people like RainbOw are not exactly newbies who don't know how to macro (and you'll notice many of the same players who 1base all in every TvZ play very strong macro games in TvT. TvP is sort of 50/50). As I said earlier, the fact that players like RainbOw feel it's necessary to use a coinflip all in build to beat no names is worrying (even on maps like Shakuras which are strongly biased towards macro and against 1base play).
|
14 hatch is not supposed to be a safe build, so don't argue like its almost imbalanced when other races try to punish it. I agree zergs need to take an earlier expansion than other races but 14 hatchery is an extremely early expansion that allows zergs to gain an economical edge quickly if unharrassed. This kind of reward will and should be risky play.
Solution: Don't 14 hatch if you can't take the heat or can't understand that its supposed to be risky.
|
On November 24 2010 03:54 Karthane wrote:
I can definetely say i don't like the direction ZvT is heading. I just got 2 rax rushed with 4 scvs pulled, bunker rushed, and then switched into 2 port cloaked banshees.
All in the same game. -_-
seen this alot too but it only kills you the first time.
|
On November 24 2010 03:54 Karthane wrote:
I can definetely say i don't like the direction ZvT is heading. I just got 2 rax rushed with 4 scvs pulled, bunker rushed, and then switched into 2 port cloaked banshees.
All in the same game. -_-
i do this all the time vs 14hatch. 2rax rine, pressure into 2 starport banhsee. has worked almost 100%. sometimes the rines are enough to win.
there are few times when you are happy to see a banelings nest, this is sucha situation.
|
On November 24 2010 03:50 Kurumi wrote:
It's pretty scary that ZvT evolves in short,boring link.
Terran finds great all-in->New strats weaken the all-in,but are not 100% proof->Patch comes out->Macro games again happen->Terran finds great all-in
This looks like Terrans infest planets,takeover the living creatures and use them in their army,while Zerg thrives in huge cities made out of skyscrapers.
It should be like
Macro games->Zerg/Terran finds new exciting strat->Macro games are full of improvisation and emotion->Terran/Zerg finds the counter->Macro games with less bland game play->Go again like this for three times->ZvT is great matchup->Expansion comes out-> Yeah You guessed right. Macro games.
macro games will be more prevalent when the maps get bigger.
|
On November 23 2010 22:16 Elementsu wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 22:08 noD wrote:
I think it´s just fair, there is no way building a second base and being safe was fair ... Too bad that if you stay on one base you lose the game anyway... Blizzard should fix this soon,it shouldn't be about "OMG i gotta stay alive for 10 minutes"
Well that's exactly what protoss have to deal with when they expand quickly. I don't understand why zerg players feel they have a right to a free fast expansion. It shouldn't be safe/easy to expand with 0 army units.
|
On November 24 2010 03:12 Dente wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 03:02 Coolcatqt wrote:
thanks for trying bronze leaguer :p but zerg cant make every building and tech at once I'm not a bronze leaguer (2200+ diamond). The terrans doing this build are on 1 base. The zergs are on 2 base. 3 spinecrawlers + lings --> some guy (I responded to him) said that the terran will scan and will not attack (+ macro up, LOL). Result: zerg on 2 base, terran on 1 base. Terran can keep on playing on 1 base but if the terran takes his natural, then there is a small window for the zerg to drone drone drone + expand. There is a reason why top korean terrans are doing these kind of builds. I'm saying this for a very long time: a good zerg is not beatable without these kind of "allinstuff". The only reason why terrans were winning before the patch was because of very strong harass. With the roach range changed (bye hellion rush) and the reaper heavy nerfed, the only other harass options are banshees (you die vs a good zerg that builds 3 queens) and hellion drop (good placed overlords and your drop will fail).
whole strength of this build is that zerg doesnt know if you are going all in or expanding, this is why they scan in the first place, guess you never played brood war if you think zerg can just make drones without scouting information
|
The build punishes a zerg for expanding so early, I don't see this as a bad thing. If a Terran goes 14 CC 14 rax a zerg would punish them for it.... (i know it is different but you get my point).
|
OC does jack !#!@# if you do it a bit earlier than normal.
Try to 14CC or forge FE and enjoy the 20 roaches knocking on your door before your 3rd barracks is even done building.
Terran can't compete with zerg's double base income + 8 production building ability at the 5 minute mark, so it's easier to just all in and win a decent amount of times.
|
On November 24 2010 02:47 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 01:18 rampaeg wrote:
Maybe blizzard should just make a better map pool with more maps like Shakuras...that would solve a lot of issues. YEAH GUY! Would you also suggest we use scrap station multiple times in ZvT series? That'd be just splendid.
you obviously feel scrap station overwhelmingly favors zerg. what features of this map cause you to come to that conclusion?
|
Hatch first transitioning into refusing to build static defence is retarded.
The Terran mentality that if the game goes longer than 5 minutes they lose is retarded.
ZvT has the potential to be a great matchup to watch but instead I get treated to Zergs who think they can 14 hatch every game on tiny ass maps and Terrans who refuse to acknowledge that they have really strong timing attacks that dont involve pulling your scvs at the 5 minute mark.
|
....The fact that so many people continually think this is only good against 14 hatch blows my mind. Let's say you don't 14 hatch; you pool first and get up lings. The Terran knows this and he wont simply suicide his first few marines if he's smart. If the Terran scouts continued ling production in enough numbers to stop the push all they have to do is put up a CC and fall back w/ the eco advantage and delay their attack a few minutes.
I'm not saying anything is broken or overpowered, but at the moment it's very strong. It's a balancing act though. You have to make juuust enough lings and juuuuust enough spine crawlers. If you make too many and the terran has expanded or began to tech, you're in trouble for that delayed push. If you think you're safe and drone up, the push can come and kill you. Right now it's on the zerg to respond properly and hope they essentially guess correctly as to when the push will actually come.
|
On November 24 2010 04:34 AnAngryDingo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 02:47 avilo wrote:On November 24 2010 01:18 rampaeg wrote:
Maybe blizzard should just make a better map pool with more maps like Shakuras...that would solve a lot of issues. YEAH GUY! Would you also suggest we use scrap station multiple times in ZvT series? That'd be just splendid. you obviously feel scrap station overwhelmingly favors zerg. what features of this map cause you to come to that conclusion?
What about insane distance to counter 14hatch? Not to mention how easy it is for Zerg to defend both main and expo at the same time.. Then you've got this close air distance, so if you try to attack Zerg - ops, few (15) mutas are immidiately killing your base.. So to put it together, Zerg is here free to expo at will and you have to stay at your base for the whole game basicly.
|
On November 24 2010 04:12 Pewt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 03:32 schimmetje wrote:
I guess things like these are easier than improving your overall game (I really don't buy the whole "it's necessary" thing, Zerg is not dominating as hard as people are suggesting). Personally I expand slightly later anyways, I consider it a flaw in my play which needs to be fixed, but it certainly helps when running into these. As such I don't mind much, though I do hope SC2 will move past the whole "must end it in 10 minutes using the flavor of the month build" thing soon, because.. well it's kind of boring. I would buy this if it were just nobodies doing these builds, but people like RainbOw are not exactly newbies who don't know how to macro (and you'll notice many of the same players who 1base all in every TvZ play very strong macro games in TvT. TvP is sort of 50/50). As I said earlier, the fact that players like RainbOw feel it's necessary to use a coinflip all in build to beat no names is worrying (even on maps like Shakuras which are strongly biased towards macro and against 1base play).
I'm a ITR fan to be honest, but I think he could have done better in other ways. If he indeed felt this was necessary, that's not a comforting thought, as said trend will then likely continue and that kind of sucks. I'm just not sure how much of people feeling it's necessary is based on fact and how much of it is the atmosphere created. For now I'm leaning more towards the latter.
|
On November 24 2010 04:21 busdriver wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 22:16 Elementsu wrote:On November 23 2010 22:08 noD wrote:
I think it´s just fair, there is no way building a second base and being safe was fair ... Too bad that if you stay on one base you lose the game anyway... Blizzard should fix this soon,it shouldn't be about "OMG i gotta stay alive for 10 minutes" Well that's exactly what protoss have to deal with when they expand quickly. I don't understand why zerg players feel they have a right to a free fast expansion. It shouldn't be safe/easy to expand with 0 army units.
Compare the strength of 2 base protoss vs 2 base zerg. Which should be easier to accomplish?
|
On November 24 2010 04:21 charlie420247 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 03:50 Kurumi wrote:
It's pretty scary that ZvT evolves in short,boring link.
Terran finds great all-in->New strats weaken the all-in,but are not 100% proof->Patch comes out->Macro games again happen->Terran finds great all-in
This looks like Terrans infest planets,takeover the living creatures and use them in their army,while Zerg thrives in huge cities made out of skyscrapers.
It should be like
Macro games->Zerg/Terran finds new exciting strat->Macro games are full of improvisation and emotion->Terran/Zerg finds the counter->Macro games with less bland game play->Go again like this for three times->ZvT is great matchup->Expansion comes out-> Yeah You guessed right. Macro games. macro games will be more prevalent when the maps get bigger.
ZvT-->Will never be a macro oriented matchup unless Terran late game get's fixed.
|
On November 24 2010 04:39 Everlong wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 04:34 AnAngryDingo wrote:On November 24 2010 02:47 avilo wrote:On November 24 2010 01:18 rampaeg wrote:
Maybe blizzard should just make a better map pool with more maps like Shakuras...that would solve a lot of issues. YEAH GUY! Would you also suggest we use scrap station multiple times in ZvT series? That'd be just splendid. you obviously feel scrap station overwhelmingly favors zerg. what features of this map cause you to come to that conclusion? What about insane distance to counter 14hatch? Not to mention how easy it is for Zerg to defend both main and expo at the same time.. Then you've got this close air distance, so if you try to attack Zerg - ops, few (15) mutas are immidiately killing your base.. So to put it together, Zerg is here free to expo at will and you have to stay at your base for the whole game basicly.
alright, this makes the map FAIR IMO. we have to travel just as far to get to terran as terran does to us. close air distance works for terran also doing drops in mid-late game. and how is it easier for zerg to defend their main and natural than any other map. long distance between means creep spread is paramount, plus those backdoor rocks(more of an issue vs protoss) also, taking a 3rd can be tricky. and mid-game, you can also break the rocks, leaving an incredibly short distance from base to base.
IMO, terrans just want more maps like steppes of war where they can just tank push a few feet from their natural to the zerg's natural, never allowing the zerg to make drones because of the constant threat of attack with no fear of a counter. or they want/need more maps that are straight up unfair and ABUSIVE such as LT and Kulas. To me, its silly for terrans to complain about the current map pool. All the "Zerg" maps are just the maps that are fair for all the races to compete on, and there are at least 4 maps currently in the pool that BLATANTLY favor terran over zerg. (LT, jungle basin lol, Steppes, and DQ) also, close positions on Metal favor terran too. you can't really argue that this is fact.
i'm not saying there isn't an issue, because there possibly is. a lot of top terrans playing this way IS alarming. i just feel like blaming "zerg maps" as the problem is not correct. there is a much deeper problem at hand if this is the only way for terran to beat zerg in high level play.
|
On November 24 2010 04:44 schimmetje wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 04:12 Pewt wrote:On November 24 2010 03:32 schimmetje wrote:
I guess things like these are easier than improving your overall game (I really don't buy the whole "it's necessary" thing, Zerg is not dominating as hard as people are suggesting). Personally I expand slightly later anyways, I consider it a flaw in my play which needs to be fixed, but it certainly helps when running into these. As such I don't mind much, though I do hope SC2 will move past the whole "must end it in 10 minutes using the flavor of the month build" thing soon, because.. well it's kind of boring. I would buy this if it were just nobodies doing these builds, but people like RainbOw are not exactly newbies who don't know how to macro (and you'll notice many of the same players who 1base all in every TvZ play very strong macro games in TvT. TvP is sort of 50/50). As I said earlier, the fact that players like RainbOw feel it's necessary to use a coinflip all in build to beat no names is worrying (even on maps like Shakuras which are strongly biased towards macro and against 1base play). I'm a ITR fan to be honest, but I think he could have done better in other ways. If he indeed felt this was necessary, that's not a comforting thought, as said trend will then likely continue and that kind of sucks. I'm just not sure how much of people feeling it's necessary is based on fact and how much of it is the atmosphere created. For now I'm leaning more towards the latter. Yeah, I don't know either way for sure, but he used to play more macro based and now he's doing all ins even on maps that are terrible for them, so apparently something or other has convinced him that they're good/necessary. It just bugs me that people are making it sound like the only people who are doing these all ins are newbies who don't really know how to play whereas in reality some of the most accomplished Terrans around are doing them over and over.
|
On November 23 2010 16:47 osten wrote:
I think 14 hatch is kind of nessesary for zerg, it's too bad that so much relies on it, it should be quite standard imo..
Funny, it wasn't necessary before they nerfed reapers...
As a Zerg player, I actually find such early expanding to be akin to cheesey all-in builds. In fact, I hope Zerg's keep FE'ing so I can get away with more 8 pools in ZvP
|
On November 24 2010 04:48 Endorsed wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 04:21 charlie420247 wrote:On November 24 2010 03:50 Kurumi wrote:
It's pretty scary that ZvT evolves in short,boring link.
Terran finds great all-in->New strats weaken the all-in,but are not 100% proof->Patch comes out->Macro games again happen->Terran finds great all-in
This looks like Terrans infest planets,takeover the living creatures and use them in their army,while Zerg thrives in huge cities made out of skyscrapers.
It should be like
Macro games->Zerg/Terran finds new exciting strat->Macro games are full of improvisation and emotion->Terran/Zerg finds the counter->Macro games with less bland game play->Go again like this for three times->ZvT is great matchup->Expansion comes out-> Yeah You guessed right. Macro games. macro games will be more prevalent when the maps get bigger. ZvT-->Will never be a macro oriented matchup unless Terran late game get's fixed.
untill zerg can hold ever possible terran opener we wont EVEN se an attempt at playing the macro game so even if terran "late game" was "fixed" the terrans would still keep allinning because they want to win and if for some reason after these "fixes" zerg cannot win the late game then WHAT HAPPENs then huh? WHAT HAPPENS THEN ?
|
On November 24 2010 04:39 Everlong wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 04:34 AnAngryDingo wrote:On November 24 2010 02:47 avilo wrote:On November 24 2010 01:18 rampaeg wrote:
Maybe blizzard should just make a better map pool with more maps like Shakuras...that would solve a lot of issues. YEAH GUY! Would you also suggest we use scrap station multiple times in ZvT series? That'd be just splendid. you obviously feel scrap station overwhelmingly favors zerg. what features of this map cause you to come to that conclusion? What about insane distance to counter 14hatch? Not to mention how easy it is for Zerg to defend both main and expo at the same time.. Then you've got this close air distance, so if you try to attack Zerg - ops, few (15) mutas are immidiately killing your base.. So to put it together, Zerg is here free to expo at will and you have to stay at your base for the whole game basicly.
What prevents you from doing a FE as well?
Why would Terran response to 14hatch systematically be "derp derp make 2rax then box all my crap including SCVs and 1A in his base"?
|
I really think the underlying problem lies with the way the macro mechanics work. If the game was played a little more like BW, we wouldn't have to see all these flaws. Think of it this way, if Terran didnt have mules and, they wouldn't recover from an allin move. If Zerg didn't have larva inject, Terrans wouldnt complain about lategame play. Same applies to Protoss, if they didn't have Chrono and Warpgates, they wouldn't have to worry about the units being nerfed to the ground due to how fast they would get them.
|
On November 24 2010 04:54 Phrencys wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 04:39 Everlong wrote:On November 24 2010 04:34 AnAngryDingo wrote:On November 24 2010 02:47 avilo wrote:On November 24 2010 01:18 rampaeg wrote:
Maybe blizzard should just make a better map pool with more maps like Shakuras...that would solve a lot of issues. YEAH GUY! Would you also suggest we use scrap station multiple times in ZvT series? That'd be just splendid. you obviously feel scrap station overwhelmingly favors zerg. what features of this map cause you to come to that conclusion? What about insane distance to counter 14hatch? Not to mention how easy it is for Zerg to defend both main and expo at the same time.. Then you've got this close air distance, so if you try to attack Zerg - ops, few (15) mutas are immidiately killing your base.. So to put it together, Zerg is here free to expo at will and you have to stay at your base for the whole game basicly. What prevents you from doing a FE as well? Why would Terran response to 14hatch systematically be "derp derp make 2rax then box all my crap including SCVs and 1A in his base"? In my irrelevant mid-diamond experience, if you FE then it's hard to push (on SS specifically) before their muta/bling numbers start getting worrying, by which point it may very well be too late on a generally large map let alone a map where you are practically breathing down each others' necks air-wise. In addition, it can be difficult to punish a Zerg response of taking a third and droning up because you miss the pre-speedling/baneling timing that this 2rax push exploits and thus if anything their units are more cost efficient than yours (even if you have stim etc).
|
On November 24 2010 04:55 Musiq wrote:
I really think the underlying problem lies with the way the macro mechanics work. If the game was played a little more like BW, we wouldn't have to see all these flaws. Think of it this way, if Terran didnt have mules and, they wouldn't recover from an allin move. If Zerg didn't have larva inject, Terrans wouldnt complain about lategame play. Same applies to Protoss, if they didn't have Chrono and Warpgates, they wouldn't have to worry about the units being nerfed to the ground due to how fast they would get them.
Exactly. Zerg are so scary lategame because they can recreate an army almost instantly. Terran have no downside to trading SCVs for drones because of MULES. So terran players are always going to try and prevent zerg late game. 3-4 bases with larva inject is so scary why would anyone allow it if they have an option?
|
alright, this makes the map FAIR IMO. we have to travel just as far to get to terran as terran does to us. close air distance works for terran also doing drops in mid-late game. and how is it easier for zerg to defend their main and natural than any other map. long distance between means creep spread is paramount, plus those backdoor rocks(more of an issue vs protoss) also, taking a 3rd can be tricky. and mid-game, you can also break the rocks, leaving an incredibly short distance from base to base.
Man, seriously.. Run Starcraft 2 -> Single Player -> Play against A.I -> Steppes of War -> play as Terran.. Try to cross this map with siege tanks so that you wont instantly lose to swarm of Zerglings catching you unsieged in 2 seconds.. Close air distance works for terran good 1-2 ingame minutes when they try to abuse banshees. Once mutas pops out you are doomed to sit back and watch Zerg cover whole map.. If you dont know, how easy it is to defend expo on this map, I suggest to watch random replay of TvZ on this map and it should be clear..
|
I watched those games and thought it was fine. Allowing no means of punishing a hatch first zerg is just stupid. So if toss canons a hatch first zerg or terran 2 rax rushes then its a valid response to a greedy opener. Making balance comments based on this evolution in the game is probably premature.
What I would say is that it says a lot when terran feels pressured to pull his scvs to all in at this point. It basically means they are running out of ideas against zerg beyond the first few minutes in the game.
What needs to be done is to somehow weaken these terran early mid game plays and buff their end game. IMO the battle cruiser nerf was a step in the wrong direction for them.
|
On November 24 2010 04:48 AnAngryDingo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 04:39 Everlong wrote:On November 24 2010 04:34 AnAngryDingo wrote:On November 24 2010 02:47 avilo wrote:On November 24 2010 01:18 rampaeg wrote:
Maybe blizzard should just make a better map pool with more maps like Shakuras...that would solve a lot of issues. YEAH GUY! Would you also suggest we use scrap station multiple times in ZvT series? That'd be just splendid. you obviously feel scrap station overwhelmingly favors zerg. what features of this map cause you to come to that conclusion? What about insane distance to counter 14hatch? Not to mention how easy it is for Zerg to defend both main and expo at the same time.. Then you've got this close air distance, so if you try to attack Zerg - ops, few (15) mutas are immidiately killing your base.. So to put it together, Zerg is here free to expo at will and you have to stay at your base for the whole game basicly. alright, this makes the map FAIR IMO. we have to travel just as far to get to terran as terran does to us. close air distance works for terran also doing drops in mid-late game. and how is it easier for zerg to defend their main and natural than any other map. long distance between means creep spread is paramount, plus those backdoor rocks(more of an issue vs protoss) also, taking a 3rd can be tricky. and mid-game, you can also break the rocks, leaving an incredibly short distance from base to base. IMO, terrans just want more maps like steppes of war where they can just tank push a few feet from their natural to the zerg's natural, never allowing the zerg to make drones because of the constant threat of attack with no fear of a counter. or they want/need more maps that are straight up unfair and ABUSIVE such as LT and Kulas. To me, its silly for terrans to complain about the current map pool. All the "Zerg" maps are just the maps that are fair for all the races to compete on, and there are at least 4 maps currently in the pool that BLATANTLY favor terran over zerg. (LT, jungle basin lol, Steppes, and DQ) also, close positions on Metal favor terran too. you can't really argue that this is fact. i'm not saying there isn't an issue, because there possibly is. a lot of top terrans playing this way IS alarming. i just feel like blaming "zerg maps" as the problem is not correct. there is a much deeper problem at hand if this is the only way for terran to beat zerg in high level play.
Except you forgot about mutalisks. If terran or protoss attack on scrap station you can send 12 mutas over and destroy all scvs/probes and still be back in time for a nap before the ground war begins. Agreed with you on LT though - thor/tank drops at the natural cliff are so frustrating and hard to stop.
|
On November 24 2010 04:49 Pewt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 04:44 schimmetje wrote:On November 24 2010 04:12 Pewt wrote:On November 24 2010 03:32 schimmetje wrote:
I guess things like these are easier than improving your overall game (I really don't buy the whole "it's necessary" thing, Zerg is not dominating as hard as people are suggesting). Personally I expand slightly later anyways, I consider it a flaw in my play which needs to be fixed, but it certainly helps when running into these. As such I don't mind much, though I do hope SC2 will move past the whole "must end it in 10 minutes using the flavor of the month build" thing soon, because.. well it's kind of boring. I would buy this if it were just nobodies doing these builds, but people like RainbOw are not exactly newbies who don't know how to macro (and you'll notice many of the same players who 1base all in every TvZ play very strong macro games in TvT. TvP is sort of 50/50). As I said earlier, the fact that players like RainbOw feel it's necessary to use a coinflip all in build to beat no names is worrying (even on maps like Shakuras which are strongly biased towards macro and against 1base play). I'm a ITR fan to be honest, but I think he could have done better in other ways. If he indeed felt this was necessary, that's not a comforting thought, as said trend will then likely continue and that kind of sucks. I'm just not sure how much of people feeling it's necessary is based on fact and how much of it is the atmosphere created. For now I'm leaning more towards the latter. Yeah, I don't know either way for sure, but he used to play more macro based and now he's doing all ins even on maps that are terrible for them, so apparently something or other has convinced him that they're good/necessary. It just bugs me that people are making it sound like the only people who are doing these all ins are newbies who don't really know how to play whereas in reality some of the most accomplished Terrans around are doing them over and over.
Oh true, there's some very good players doing this. I just wish they didn't, because I do feel they can do better and because of the signal it sends to, well, the less good players. Still confident someone will eventually move beyond this phase into something new though. Well. Somewhat confident. Ehm. Anyone? Please?
|
The solution is more requirements to orbital. in SC1 you need the academy which is made after u get ur expo cc up and make second rax & gaz, so all ins cant be done with perfect scouting info like the 2rax in sc2, thus they maintain more risk and are tried less often.
|
On November 24 2010 05:06 xarthaz wrote:
The solution is more requirements to orbital. in SC1 you need the academy which is made after u get ur expo cc up and make second rax & gaz, so all ins cant be done with perfect scouting info like the 2rax in sc2, thus they maintain more risk and are tried less often.
The solution isn't nerf T, it's buff T's late game so they aren't desperate to win early. It's not even like this all in 2 rax stuff works all that often, even in the GSL it's only working about 50% of the time.
|
I have heard so many complaints when I do this rush against greedy Zergs but the only response I can give is, hey, if I 14 CC are you really going to just sit there and watch? No, you'r gunna punish me so it's only fair that Zergs don't just get a free expansion.
On November 24 2010 05:06 xarthaz wrote:
The solution is more requirements to orbital. in SC1 you need the academy which is made after u get ur expo cc up and make second rax & gaz, so all ins cant be done with perfect scouting info like the 2rax in sc2, thus they maintain more risk and are tried less often.
Are you kidding me? Yeah, sure lets just make the one race that can't keep up already macro wise and nerf the macro mechanic EVEN MORE. Theres nothing OP about punishing someone who blindly 14 hatches and it's stupid to expect a free expansion like that. If anything, without the 2 rax rush, Zerg's ability to expand that fast would be OP because as I stated above, anytime I try to fast expo I lose unless I 2 rax expand.
Nerfing Orbitals is not even an option. The only reason so many Terrans timing attack, rush, and cheese is because if the game goes in to a macro mode good luck getting any advantage unless you do some major damage with harassment. This is a big reason why I am considering switching races, because I love the Terran mechanics and units but overall I like to macro and not being able to do so on an even play field without my opponent messing up is very discouraging.
|
On November 24 2010 05:07 DooMDash wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 05:06 xarthaz wrote:
The solution is more requirements to orbital. in SC1 you need the academy which is made after u get ur expo cc up and make second rax & gaz, so all ins cant be done with perfect scouting info like the 2rax in sc2, thus they maintain more risk and are tried less often. The solution isn't nerf T, it's buff T's late game so they aren't desperate to win early. It's not even like this all in 2 rax stuff works all that often, even in the GSL it's only working about 50% of the time.
Actually its to do both. Terran early game is fine. Its basically the early mid game thats the problem esp for toss. There are some very powerful allins that are impossible to stop even when scouted. See the Genius game yesterday to see one of these. He would have lost that game if his opponent hadnt made the mistake of going up the ramp too soon. Something needs to be done about these while at the same time buffing terran late game.
|
On November 24 2010 05:14 WickedBit wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 05:07 DooMDash wrote:On November 24 2010 05:06 xarthaz wrote:
The solution is more requirements to orbital. in SC1 you need the academy which is made after u get ur expo cc up and make second rax & gaz, so all ins cant be done with perfect scouting info like the 2rax in sc2, thus they maintain more risk and are tried less often. The solution isn't nerf T, it's buff T's late game so they aren't desperate to win early. It's not even like this all in 2 rax stuff works all that often, even in the GSL it's only working about 50% of the time. Actually its to do both. Terran early game is fine. Its basically the early mid game thats the problem esp for toss. There are some very powerful allins that are impossible to stop even when scouted. See the Genius game yesterday to see one of these. He would have lost that game if his opponent hadnt made the mistake of going up the ramp too soon. Something needs to be done about these while at the same time buffing terran late game.
I wouldn't say the solution is to nerf T's early mid so much as to fix P's early game being so fragile, but yeah, if this all in does turn out to be too powerful (right now it's not doing all that great) then it should obviously be nerfed at the same time as making Terran late game more playable.
(And yeah, I was extremely surprised that Libero managed to lose that... no idea why he pushed out of range of his tanks)
|
On November 24 2010 05:08 ckw wrote:I have heard so many complaints when I do this rush against greedy Zergs but the only response I can give is, hey, if I 14 CC are you really going to just sit there and watch? No, you'r gunna punish me so it's only fair that Zergs don't just get a free expansion. Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 05:06 xarthaz wrote:
The solution is more requirements to orbital. in SC1 you need the academy which is made after u get ur expo cc up and make second rax & gaz, so all ins cant be done with perfect scouting info like the 2rax in sc2, thus they maintain more risk and are tried less often. Are you kidding me? Yeah, sure lets just make the one race that can't keep up already macro wise and nerf the macro mechanic EVEN MORE. Theres nothing OP about punishing someone who blindly 14 hatches and it's stupid to expect a free expansion like that. If anything, without the 2 rax rush, Zerg's ability to expand that fast would be OP because as I stated above, anytime I try to fast expo I lose unless I 2 rax expand. Nerfing Orbitals is not even an option. The only reason so many Terrans timing attack, rush, and cheese is because if the game goes in to a macro mode good luck getting any advantage unless you do some major damage with harassment. This is a big reason why I am considering switching races, because I love the Terran mechanics and units but overall I like to macro and not being able to do so on an even play field without my opponent messing up is very discouraging.
The problem is you're justifying the rush by implying it's only good against 14 hatch. Against pool first the build is almost as good; that's where the problem lies. The game plays out very differently if the zerg opens pool first, but it doesn't suddenly stop the 2 rax build in its tracks unless the terran doesn't have a follow through and just suicides into lings.
|
On November 24 2010 05:07 DooMDash wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 05:06 xarthaz wrote:
The solution is more requirements to orbital. in SC1 you need the academy which is made after u get ur expo cc up and make second rax & gaz, so all ins cant be done with perfect scouting info like the 2rax in sc2, thus they maintain more risk and are tried less often. The solution isn't nerf T, it's buff T's late game so they aren't desperate to win early. It's not even like this all in 2 rax stuff works all that often, even in the GSL it's only working about 50% of the time.
There are two fundamental flaws to your understanding of the game here.
1) any strategy that works even 51% of the time is a winning strategy. Many poker pros could explain this simple concept to you.
The other problem is you're considering 14 hatch as some sort of advantage.
There is no economic advantage to 14 hatch, it is purely positional. Your economic advantage won't kick in for another 5 min when you have 2 queens spamming spawn larva. By that time it is completely feasible for a terran to have his expo set up as well and we're back to square 1.
|
Seriosly people need to stop this 14 hatch is countered by 2 rax BS.
1) Where did you all get 14 hatch from, NONE of the GSL games in discussions had 14 hatch, they were all 15 hatch, but that is just a side note.
2) The push comes AFTER your expansion is up or going up weather you hatch or pool first.
3) pool/gas first has advantage of having ling speed/early blings, BUT does not have creep and spines and queens at natural. So it a hard call what is worse... I would take creep/spines and queens to ling speed and couple of blings.
4) IT is hardly unstoppable so far it has been stoped several times just fine, in fact if it is stoped it is auto loss for t.
|
On November 24 2010 02:47 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 01:18 rampaeg wrote:
Maybe blizzard should just make a better map pool with more maps like Shakuras...that would solve a lot of issues. YEAH GUY! Would you also suggest we use scrap station multiple times in ZvT series? That'd be just splendid.
Im just saying that Terran 2 rax counter to Zerg FE is much less viable on a larger map like Shakuras, and suggesting that maybe the problems people are having with the Metagame are somewhat due to maps, not all balance issues. I think that's a factor that should be explored more instead of nerfing and buffing away to later realize it had to do with the map pool. Just a thought I was having..
|
I have to say that I am sick of this trend as a T player, I despise having to do this 2 rax no gas pressure, its very one dimensional and provides very one sided games. Unfortunetaly, until blizz patches the T late game T will not stop doing this. I miss the BW days where TvZ was interesting because the tank was very strong and the Z's marine killer was similair to a siege tank as it had to sacrifice movement for insane dmg.
|
On November 24 2010 05:22 Jermstuddog wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 05:07 DooMDash wrote:On November 24 2010 05:06 xarthaz wrote:
The solution is more requirements to orbital. in SC1 you need the academy which is made after u get ur expo cc up and make second rax & gaz, so all ins cant be done with perfect scouting info like the 2rax in sc2, thus they maintain more risk and are tried less often. The solution isn't nerf T, it's buff T's late game so they aren't desperate to win early. It's not even like this all in 2 rax stuff works all that often, even in the GSL it's only working about 50% of the time. There are two fundamental flaws to your understanding of the game here. 1) any strategy that works even 51% of the time is a winning strategy. Many poker pros could explain this simple concept to you. The other problem is you're considering 14 hatch as some sort of advantage. There is no economic advantage to 14 hatch, it is purely positional. Your economic advantage won't kick in for another 5 min when you have 2 queens spamming spawn larva. By that time it is completely feasible for a terran to have his expo set up as well and we're back to square 1.
Well until we figure out the exact numbers of how successful this 2 rax rush is, we won't know if #1 is correct.
I consider 14 hatch an advantage, just like I consider being a base up in general an advantage. 14 hatch is pretty safe, and even relatively safe against these all in strats. Foxer with 400 APM godly marine micro , with 15+ scvs, and ton of marines couldn't even beat a blind 14 hatch in the GSL finals... I'd call that pretty safe.
|
On November 24 2010 05:22 Jermstuddog wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 05:07 DooMDash wrote:On November 24 2010 05:06 xarthaz wrote:
The solution is more requirements to orbital. in SC1 you need the academy which is made after u get ur expo cc up and make second rax & gaz, so all ins cant be done with perfect scouting info like the 2rax in sc2, thus they maintain more risk and are tried less often. The solution isn't nerf T, it's buff T's late game so they aren't desperate to win early. It's not even like this all in 2 rax stuff works all that often, even in the GSL it's only working about 50% of the time. There are two fundamental flaws to your understanding of the game here. 1) any strategy that works even 51% of the time is a winning strategy. Many poker pros could explain this simple concept to you. The other problem is you're considering 14 hatch as some sort of advantage. There is no economic advantage to 14 hatch, it is purely positional. Your economic advantage won't kick in for another 5 min when you have 2 queens spamming spawn larva. By that time it is completely feasible for a terran to have his expo set up as well and we're back to square 1.
Hmm how do you determine 51% from? Overall games on the ladder? Then 4 gate is best strat ever since on the ladder it probably has 70% win rate.
14 hatch does have economic advantage, stop this nonsense. It becomes clear very quickly way before 2 queens because you can use 1 larva to place one spine and be safer then with 3 sets of lings (which take 150 minerals, 3 larva and 100/100 research to be of any use) So that 3-4 marine/2 scv push does not force you to make 12 slow lings just not to die.
|
Also if this 2 rax is as popular as everyone says, all Z's in korea must have abandoned the 14 hatch build since Z is beating T by a pretty solid margin in korea.
|
On November 24 2010 05:32 DooMDash wrote:
Also if this 2 rax is as popular as everyone says, all Z's in korea must have abandoned the 14 hatch build since Z is beating T by a pretty solid margin in korea.
Unless it's steppes or something a well played zerg should defend 2rax allin while fast expanding.
Unless you did something dumb like make drones when the pool is finished.
|
I think people are a little bit brain-washed by Artosis's biased commentary. He's obviously a Zerg player and makes it sound like Zerg always has problems and T should always be winning because how powerful their desperate all ins are.
|
On November 24 2010 05:41 DooMDash wrote:
I think people are a little bit brain-washed by Artosis's biased commentary. He's obviously a Zerg player and makes it sound like Zerg always has problems and T should always be winning because how powerful their desperate all in is.
The guy will stop crying and be biased when he wins 1st place. Which will never happen since he doesn't even break through preliminaries. should just use jason lee + idra to replace him. Idras biased as hell but he barely speaks so it balances out.
|
On November 24 2010 05:42 klauz619 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 05:41 DooMDash wrote:
I think people are a little bit brain-washed by Artosis's biased commentary. He's obviously a Zerg player and makes it sound like Zerg always has problems and T should always be winning because how powerful their desperate all in is. The guy will stop crying and be biased when he wins 1st place. Which will never happen since he doesn't even break through preliminaries. should just use jason lee + idra to replace him. Idras biased as hell but he barely speaks so it balances out.
On November 23 2010 17:42 IdrA wrote:
its not even an anti-fast expand build, its nearly as good vs pool first
they can have 7-9 marines at your choke before speed finishes even if you 14 gas 14 pool, means you have to make constant lings off of pool first to just barely defend the rush, and the thing is if they scout you making pure lings they just put down a command center and are way ahead. even if you completely stop the rush you have a bunch of useless zerglings and they have more workers than you, and you have a late hatch.
its a build that can punish anything thats not purely defensive, but it sacrifices like 1 scv of economy.
On November 23 2010 17:58 IdrA wrote:
the problem with that is its so easy to nullify hatch tech aggression, they put the barracks at the choke anyway so they have a thick wallin ready for banelings and 1-2 bunkers makes offensive roaches useless. the whole point is that this build requires an overwhelming response from z and its really easy for t to just make that response a waste of money.
His points should be well taken, especially since this is 15 pages of people repeating the same thing instead of reading.
|
On November 24 2010 05:22 Jermstuddog wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 05:07 DooMDash wrote:On November 24 2010 05:06 xarthaz wrote:
The solution is more requirements to orbital. in SC1 you need the academy which is made after u get ur expo cc up and make second rax & gaz, so all ins cant be done with perfect scouting info like the 2rax in sc2, thus they maintain more risk and are tried less often. The solution isn't nerf T, it's buff T's late game so they aren't desperate to win early. It's not even like this all in 2 rax stuff works all that often, even in the GSL it's only working about 50% of the time. There are two fundamental flaws to your understanding of the game here. 1) any strategy that works even 51% of the time is a winning strategy. Many poker pros could explain this simple concept to you. The other problem is you're considering 14 hatch as some sort of advantage. There is no economic advantage to 14 hatch, it is purely positional. Your economic advantage won't kick in for another 5 min when you have 2 queens spamming spawn larva. By that time it is completely feasible for a terran to have his expo set up as well and we're back to square 1.
And there's a fundamental flaw in your understanding as well (and as a poker player i'll tell you why), just because something is a winning strategy does not mean it's the most optimal thing to do. The fact is, at this moment in the evolution of SC2 the OC into Marine/SCV seems like the most optimal strategy in early TvZ when your opponent continues to go 14 hatch.
Another question I pose to you would be this, if 14 hatch isn't an advantage, why does every Zerg love going hatch before pool if they believe it's possible? I don't know about you but I only make moves that I believe give me an advantage.
If Terran late game was buffed you would see less all in 14 hatch counters by T because it would no longer be the optimal thing to do.
|
Personally I think this new T rush is ridiculously strong and I really hope this gets patched out of existence.
|
On November 24 2010 05:51 FlamingTurd wrote:
Personally I think this new T rush is ridiculously strong and I really hope this gets patched out of existence.
/signed. Its a lame strategy and its overpowered
|
if a zerg wants to blind fast expand, this is what they deserve
spawning fool before hatchery would fix this
|
On November 24 2010 05:51 FlamingTurd wrote:
Personally I think this new T rush is ridiculously strong and I really hope this gets patched out of existence.
Yeah everytime zerg loses a new patch should be addressed so that the zerg who haven't improved at all since beta retains their 65% win rate. Seems to be the trend now.
|
On November 24 2010 05:51 FlamingTurd wrote:
Personally I think this new T rush is ridiculously strong and I really hope this gets patched out of existence.
I agree that its strong and stupid and wish it didn't exist, but it shouldn't be necessary and with the current state of the game it seems like it is. T can't win late game and this seems to be the strongest early attack possible, which makes it the dominant strategy at the moment.
|
On November 24 2010 05:22 Jermstuddog wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 05:07 DooMDash wrote:On November 24 2010 05:06 xarthaz wrote:
The solution is more requirements to orbital. in SC1 you need the academy which is made after u get ur expo cc up and make second rax & gaz, so all ins cant be done with perfect scouting info like the 2rax in sc2, thus they maintain more risk and are tried less often. The solution isn't nerf T, it's buff T's late game so they aren't desperate to win early. It's not even like this all in 2 rax stuff works all that often, even in the GSL it's only working about 50% of the time. The other problem is you're considering 14 hatch as some sort of advantage. There is no economic advantage to 14 hatch, it is purely positional. Your economic advantage won't kick in for another 5 min when you have 2 queens spamming spawn larva. By that time it is completely feasible for a terran to have his expo set up as well and we're back to square 1.
How does 14 hatch NOT give the Zerg an advantage? It means an early expansion, and if un-contested by the Terran the Zerg will have a fully saturated expo while the Terrans is either just beginning his or floating it over. Thats an advantage if you ask me that shouldn't be automatic and should come with HEAVY risk that both the other races take when they do an early FE build.
On November 24 2010 05:56 Coolcatqt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 05:51 FlamingTurd wrote:
Personally I think this new T rush is ridiculously strong and I really hope this gets patched out of existence. /signed. Its a lame strategy and its overpowered
wouldn't that mean that 14 hatch is OP then since it gives the Zerg a huge unfair advantage? Maybe you guys should practice what you preach because last time I heard a Terran complain everyone told them to give it time, this strategy hasn't even been out that long and with a few spines it can be held off easily.
|
Why should terran get a patch nerf because they only have one option vs the most common used zerg build which gives the Z a massive advantage if T doesn't all-in to stop it?
Agreed it boring to watch, well the fault is just as much on the zerg going 14hatch every game so that the T has to go 2rax every game to try and counter it.
|
On November 24 2010 05:42 klauz619 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 05:41 DooMDash wrote:
I think people are a little bit brain-washed by Artosis's biased commentary. He's obviously a Zerg player and makes it sound like Zerg always has problems and T should always be winning because how powerful their desperate all in is. The guy will stop crying and be biased when he wins 1st place. Which will never happen since he doesn't even break through preliminaries. should just use jason lee + idra to replace him. Idras biased as hell but he barely speaks so it balances out.
Leave Him alone he is great commentator and good zerg, Not he best due to him switching into casting too much (and not being Korean ). But very good never the less better then 99% of LT forum users.
That said his crying like a little girl about this build is getting annoying.
|
You know, there was a thread about protosses bad performance in GSL. I'm a protoss and soon I was convinced that something is wrong with PvZ. However then I watched the GSL Ro64 matches that have been played this far, and I feel more and more that PvZ just might be fine. True, none of the PvZ players on either side have been miracle workers, and I think that just might be the reason why there has not been that much protoss success. YES I KNOW saying "protoss just need to learn and play" is not constructive, but I have to agree. The protoss in GSL made some SERIOUS mistakes that common sense could have prevented. For example: having Only 1 pylon powering all unit buildings. If there had been even one more, a full round of units would have followed and the protoss would not have died ( anyproPrime vs  TheBestfOu ), I suspect.
I watched some of the PvZ protoss victories from both GSL and some from pro protoss players, and my victory percent versus my own level zerg shot up from near 0%. I feel more and more like that I psyched myself into believing "it's imbalanced - there is nothing I can do" and thus just gave up every time I met a zerg. Not push "surrender" button, but gave up mentally.
So what I'm trying to say here is pretty much what Z and T players said to P in that "P whine thread": players will adapt. I am confident that zerg players will find new ways to "counter" this specific strategy. It was done in the GSL so it's possible.
No need to "patch it into oblivion"
|
I feel like this is another annoying over reaction to a fast hatch at the natch. As a zerg player i can say it IS necessary to make a second hatch very fucking fast if you dont want to get steamrolled by the first push simply because the hatch is where we make all our units. the fact that the hatch is at the natural is often just out of convenience...ie, we would expand there eventually anyways so it makes more sense to put it there than in the base...really doesn't matter that much. most of those early fast expands never get close to saturated early on...they're for MAKING UNITS. Like offensive units.
|
On November 24 2010 06:05 TonyT123 wrote:
I feel like this is another annoying over reaction to a fast hatch at the natch. As a zerg player i can say it IS necessary to make a second hatch very fucking fast if you dont want to get steamrolled by the first push simply because the hatch is where we make all our units. the fact that the hatch is at the natural is often just out of convenience...ie, we would expand there eventually anyways so it makes more sense to put it there than in the base...really doesn't matter that much. most of those early fast expands never get close to saturated early on...they're for MAKING UNITS. Like offensive units.
I played Zerg until recently as well and I can tell you that in the beginning of release it was impossible to 14 hatch and all the Zergs got a long just fine. I see things like this; the 14 hatch is a cookie and Zergs are the kids who don't want that cookie to be taken away. Sure, you produce units from you'r hatcheries but if it was such an issue making units from 1 hatch then how would builds like the 5 RR be so effective? You have to come up with something better than that man.
Also, haven't you ever heard that after an early Zerg expo you can't even support units from both hatcheries because you aren't getting enough minerals so your point is completely invalid until the time in game that you would be making a SAFE expo and actually being able to use the extra larvae. Thats why when you 14 CC you use you'r queens first energy to make a creep tumor and not inject.
|
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 kinda agree with this (i think it's just a strong opening rather than being cheese). i open with 2 rax, send like 5-6 scvs when i hit 6 rines, then build a cc while im pressuring and prepare for mid game. it's kinda like how some protoss do a cheese opening as a standard, because normally the cheese will hurt the cheesed-player more than the cheeser, even if it gets stopped.
|
Ok, here's a little homework for everybody who thinks 14 hatch or any similar opening is advantageous for Zerg.
Open up any high-level ZvT replay that involves a fast hatchery.
Press I and get to the income tab.
Mark down the time at which Zerg overtakes Terran for having a higher income between them.
There will be a tiny blip at the 9-10 worker mark, then zerg starts building structures and he will remain significantly behind in econ until the 8+ minute mark. I guarantee you will find nothing to the contrary.
Feel free to link any replay that proves otherwise right here.
|
On November 24 2010 06:08 ckw wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 06:05 TonyT123 wrote:
I feel like this is another annoying over reaction to a fast hatch at the natch. As a zerg player i can say it IS necessary to make a second hatch very fucking fast if you dont want to get steamrolled by the first push simply because the hatch is where we make all our units. the fact that the hatch is at the natural is often just out of convenience...ie, we would expand there eventually anyways so it makes more sense to put it there than in the base...really doesn't matter that much. most of those early fast expands never get close to saturated early on...they're for MAKING UNITS. Like offensive units. I played Zerg until recently as well and I can tell you that in the beginning of release it was impossible to 14 hatch and all the Zergs got a long just fine. I see things like this; the 14 hatch is a cookie and Zergs are the kids who don't want that cookie to be taken away. Sure, you produce units from you'r hatcheries but if it was such an issue making units from 1 hatch then how would builds like the 5 RR be so effective? You have to come up with something better than that man.
5 RR is effective? are you in bronze dude? Sorry but your opinion just took a huge fall in importance.
P.S. oh and before patch zerg WERE NOT fine, that is why we got patch in first place ( 2 in fact )
|
Zergs are being greedy so they are losing to rushes.. makes sense. Artosis says it himself that hatch first is a BAD build, but im sure lots of Zergs will think they "have the right" to the fastest possible expansion
|
w/e when terrans are flipping out over a FE i just build the 2nd hatch in my main instead. what am i supposed to do w/ all those resources and no larva? just sit on em? having money and no larva to make units is how they get ya.
|
On November 24 2010 06:10 Jermstuddog wrote:
Ok, here's a little homework for everybody who thinks 14 hatch or any similar opening is advantageous for Zerg.
Open up any high-level ZvT replay that involves a fast hatchery.
Press I and get to the income tab.
Mark down the time at which Zerg overtakes Terran for having a higher income between them.
There will be a tiny blip at the 9-10 worker mark, then zerg starts building structures and he will remain significantly behind in econ until the 8+ minute mark. I guarantee you will find nothing to the contrary.
Feel free to link any replay that proves otherwise right here.
tested this, it is true
Keep defending your 1 base allins, Terranwhiners
|
On November 24 2010 06:10 Jermstuddog wrote:
Ok, here's a little homework for everybody who thinks 14 hatch or any similar opening is advantageous for Zerg.
Open up any high-level ZvT replay that involves a fast hatchery.
Press I and get to the income tab.
Mark down the time at which Zerg overtakes Terran for having a higher income between them.
There will be a tiny blip at the 9-10 worker mark, then zerg starts building structures and he will remain significantly behind in econ until the 8+ minute mark. I guarantee you will find nothing to the contrary.
Feel free to link any replay that proves otherwise right here.
This is the same for ANY of the races that would take an expansion that fast. Show ME a replay that proves otherwise.
On November 24 2010 06:12 Coolcatqt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 06:10 Jermstuddog wrote:
Ok, here's a little homework for everybody who thinks 14 hatch or any similar opening is advantageous for Zerg.
Open up any high-level ZvT replay that involves a fast hatchery.
Press I and get to the income tab.
Mark down the time at which Zerg overtakes Terran for having a higher income between them.
There will be a tiny blip at the 9-10 worker mark, then zerg starts building structures and he will remain significantly behind in econ until the 8+ minute mark. I guarantee you will find nothing to the contrary.
Feel free to link any replay that proves otherwise right here. tested this, it is true Keep defending your 1 base allins, Terranwhiners
Last time I checked the Terrans weren't the ones whining, you were. lol, how cute.
|
On November 24 2010 06:05 TonyT123 wrote:
I feel like this is another annoying over reaction to a fast hatch at the natch. As a zerg player i can say it IS necessary to make a second hatch very fucking fast if you dont want to get steamrolled by the first push simply because the hatch is where we make all our units. the fact that the hatch is at the natural is often just out of convenience...ie, we would expand there eventually anyways so it makes more sense to put it there than in the base...really doesn't matter that much. most of those early fast expands never get close to saturated early on...they're for MAKING UNITS. Like offensive units.
you don't feel that main your 2nd hatch in the main would be infinitely easier to defend? When I first switched to Zerg that's all I did exactly for the reason that it makes it that much easier to defend. I eventually started 14 hatching at my expo when I started getting better and could defend easier, and continue to do so because so few people are able to properly execute the marine/scv rush and basically just give me a free win. At the very very very top level the players can take down the natural easily with this rush but think about how much easier it would be to stop with the hatch in your main and a couple spine crawlers at the top of your ramp. You expand to your natural when you're able to without dying, just like P and T have to. You don't see Protoss making 2 gateways at their natural do you? Why should Zerg be able to make a building at their natural with no punishment, this is something I've just never understood why we think we should just automatically get a free expansion, logical just doesn't make sense to me.
|
On November 24 2010 05:51 FlamingTurd wrote:
Personally I think this new T rush is ridiculously strong and I really hope this gets patched out of existence.
They cannot patch the rush itself out. I mean, what are they gonna do? Make marine cost gas? They already made the Depot first change so slow it down and I think it's as far as they can get.
The problem here is Zerg's weak/unstable early game, not Terran's rush.
Problem #1: Zerg need a 2nd hatch pronto otherwise they'll be larvae starved in the following minutes.
Problem #2: Zerg cannot make a solid D until they have creep, whereas Protoss/Terran can wall their choke.
Something has to change in zerg early game. They need to look at small design tweaks like allowing OLs to generate creep right away to position spines earlier. They should also consider making Hatchery and/or Queen and/or spine build faster. There are other avenues such as boosting base larvae generation or making injects add a couple more larvaes, but these would probably ruin mid and late game balance.
Another crippling factor is how every single tier1 unit need Lair to have a decent moving speed off-creep. Combine that with the fact T can wall-off safely there's no wonder why every single zerg is expected to make 40 drones before making anything else. Zerg is pinned in his base by design, and it doesn't even have the necessary mechanics to have a proper early defense.
|
The problem is not with Terran, it's with the fact that
A) Blizzard maps are way too small so they're prone to rushes
B) Terran can't macro against Zerg, you will lose. You have to punish them for early econ
|
I know there's a lot of decent discussion in this thread, but pointing out a response to a fast expansion is "cheese" is really ignorant and has no place in serious discussion. A measured response to a scouted build with a high chance of success is the opposite of cheese - it's proper play as opposed to blind rushing based on trickery.
I really wish cheese was a bannable term when thrown around incorrectly at this point =/
|
The rush hasn't been shown to be even close to gamebreaking; hell, in the GSL it's performing rather poorly so far (although we obviously have a very small amount of data). Why are people so up in arms about it being ridiculous with basically no backing?
edit: Phrencys, Zerglings need creep to move effectively? That's news to me.
Also, Roaches may not have jetpacks pre-lair, but they move just as fast as Marines so if Roaches are pinned into your base until Lair then Marines are pinned into their base for eternity.
|
On November 24 2010 06:14 The Icon wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 06:05 TonyT123 wrote:
I feel like this is another annoying over reaction to a fast hatch at the natch. As a zerg player i can say it IS necessary to make a second hatch very fucking fast if you dont want to get steamrolled by the first push simply because the hatch is where we make all our units. the fact that the hatch is at the natural is often just out of convenience...ie, we would expand there eventually anyways so it makes more sense to put it there than in the base...really doesn't matter that much. most of those early fast expands never get close to saturated early on...they're for MAKING UNITS. Like offensive units. you don't feel that main your 2nd hatch in the main would be infinitely easier to defend? When I first switched to Zerg that's all I did exactly for the reason that it makes it that much easier to defend. I eventually started 14 hatching at my expo when I started getting better and could defend easier, and continue to do so because so few people are able to properly execute the marine/scv rush and basically just give me a free win. At the very very very top level the players can take down the natural easily with this rush but think about how much easier it would be to stop with the hatch in your main and a couple spine crawlers at the top of your ramp. You expand to your natural when you're able to without dying, just like P and T have to. You don't see Protoss making 2 gateways at their natural do you? Why should Zerg be able to make a building at their natural with no punishment, this is something I've just never understood why we think we should just automatically get a free expansion, logical just doesn't make sense to me.
Nice to see some unbiased posts every now and then. Thank you for being honest and avoiding the bandwagon influence.
|
On November 24 2010 06:14 The Icon wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 06:05 TonyT123 wrote:
I feel like this is another annoying over reaction to a fast hatch at the natch. As a zerg player i can say it IS necessary to make a second hatch very fucking fast if you dont want to get steamrolled by the first push simply because the hatch is where we make all our units. the fact that the hatch is at the natural is often just out of convenience...ie, we would expand there eventually anyways so it makes more sense to put it there than in the base...really doesn't matter that much. most of those early fast expands never get close to saturated early on...they're for MAKING UNITS. Like offensive units. you don't feel that main your 2nd hatch in the main would be infinitely easier to defend? When I first switched to Zerg that's all I did exactly for the reason that it makes it that much easier to defend. I eventually started 14 hatching at my expo when I started getting better and could defend easier, and continue to do so because so few people are able to properly execute the marine/scv rush and basically just give me a free win. At the very very very top level the players can take down the natural easily with this rush but think about how much easier it would be to stop with the hatch in your main and a couple spine crawlers at the top of your ramp. You expand to your natural when you're able to without dying, just like P and T have to. You don't see Protoss making 2 gateways at their natural do you? Why should Zerg be able to make a building at their natural with no punishment, this is something I've just never understood why we think we should just automatically get a free expansion, logical just doesn't make sense to me.
Stop comparing apples to oranges already.
Why p and t do not build at natural?
1) They do? not too usual but they do
2) both p and t have ways to take advantage of ramp and high ground:
Wall ins with marines behind, 1 zelot in artificial choke stoping 10 lings, FF the ramp to split the army etc..
Zerg on the other hand DOES NOT benefit from high ground early on, Once you have some roaches then maybe. One thing possible is to hatch at the ramp and spine like you did in BW but anyone even see that one in pro game? So until roaches you are much better in open space where you can surround with lings, trust me i d rather fight 10 marines 10 scvs at the natural then near my ramp where i cant even get to marines. So in this case high ground and ramp give advantage to attacker rather then defender, making it pointless to hatch in the main.
P.S. Unbiased post LAWL right
|
Are we REALLY discussing an allin that defeats a VERY GREEDY FE by zerg? Come on people...
|
On November 24 2010 06:14 The Icon wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 06:05 TonyT123 wrote:
I feel like this is another annoying over reaction to a fast hatch at the natch. As a zerg player i can say it IS necessary to make a second hatch very fucking fast if you dont want to get steamrolled by the first push simply because the hatch is where we make all our units. the fact that the hatch is at the natural is often just out of convenience...ie, we would expand there eventually anyways so it makes more sense to put it there than in the base...really doesn't matter that much. most of those early fast expands never get close to saturated early on...they're for MAKING UNITS. Like offensive units. you don't feel that main your 2nd hatch in the main would be infinitely easier to defend? When I first switched to Zerg that's all I did exactly for the reason that it makes it that much easier to defend. I eventually started 14 hatching at my expo when I started getting better and could defend easier, and continue to do so because so few people are able to properly execute the marine/scv rush and basically just give me a free win. At the very very very top level the players can take down the natural easily with this rush but think about how much easier it would be to stop with the hatch in your main and a couple spine crawlers at the top of your ramp. You expand to your natural when you're able to without dying, just like P and T have to. You don't see Protoss making 2 gateways at their natural do you? Why should Zerg be able to make a building at their natural with no punishment, this is something I've just never understood why we think we should just automatically get a free expansion, logical just doesn't make sense to me.
as i said ill make the hatch in the main if i feel like i need to, but its more convenient to put it at the natural simply because you'll hopefully be expanding there anyways. and then when your ready for your third hatch, put it at another expo. its usually not till late in the game that i start doubling up hatches at bases, it just seems wasteful since i'd be putting one at an expo anyways. its just a quirk based on the fact that our unit production buildings are the same as our resource collecting buildings...its not like that fast expo is gonna be magically instantly saturated, like T always seems to fear, enough to go ALL IN with SCVS.
|
i dont see a problem with this rush so far, one or two spine crawlers should be able to stop that until you get speedlings and banelings a bit later - i dont think this will lead to huge economic disadvantages since the 2 rax opening also also has its disadvantages if it doesnt cause any damage to zerg and as said before very few people are able to execute it well
|
On November 24 2010 06:13 ckw wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 06:10 Jermstuddog wrote:
Ok, here's a little homework for everybody who thinks 14 hatch or any similar opening is advantageous for Zerg.
Open up any high-level ZvT replay that involves a fast hatchery.
Press I and get to the income tab.
Mark down the time at which Zerg overtakes Terran for having a higher income between them.
There will be a tiny blip at the 9-10 worker mark, then zerg starts building structures and he will remain significantly behind in econ until the 8+ minute mark. I guarantee you will find nothing to the contrary.
Feel free to link any replay that proves otherwise right here. This is the same for ANY of the races that would take an expansion that fast. Show ME a replay that proves otherwise. Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 06:12 Coolcatqt wrote:On November 24 2010 06:10 Jermstuddog wrote:
Ok, here's a little homework for everybody who thinks 14 hatch or any similar opening is advantageous for Zerg.
Open up any high-level ZvT replay that involves a fast hatchery.
Press I and get to the income tab.
Mark down the time at which Zerg overtakes Terran for having a higher income between them.
There will be a tiny blip at the 9-10 worker mark, then zerg starts building structures and he will remain significantly behind in econ until the 8+ minute mark. I guarantee you will find nothing to the contrary.
Feel free to link any replay that proves otherwise right here. tested this, it is true Keep defending your 1 base allins, Terranwhiners Last time I checked the Terrans weren't the ones whining, you were. lol, how cute.
im reading your posts, and they are full of whine :p cute
To all the people talking about a free expo, you're obviously scrubs that never played brood war, most balanced game ever and thats how it worked there too unless you were cheesed (Sounds like sc2 huh)
|
Why does everyone insist on going 14 hatch. The overhead of having to produce more drones to saturate leaves you relatively defenseless. It's better to expand off of 13 gas/pool speedlings with a queen, as you can gauge how many lings you need and how many drones you can afford to pump using your initial lings for scouting.
|
On November 24 2010 06:17 ckw wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 06:14 The Icon wrote:On November 24 2010 06:05 TonyT123 wrote:
I feel like this is another annoying over reaction to a fast hatch at the natch. As a zerg player i can say it IS necessary to make a second hatch very fucking fast if you dont want to get steamrolled by the first push simply because the hatch is where we make all our units. the fact that the hatch is at the natural is often just out of convenience...ie, we would expand there eventually anyways so it makes more sense to put it there than in the base...really doesn't matter that much. most of those early fast expands never get close to saturated early on...they're for MAKING UNITS. Like offensive units. you don't feel that main your 2nd hatch in the main would be infinitely easier to defend? When I first switched to Zerg that's all I did exactly for the reason that it makes it that much easier to defend. I eventually started 14 hatching at my expo when I started getting better and could defend easier, and continue to do so because so few people are able to properly execute the marine/scv rush and basically just give me a free win. At the very very very top level the players can take down the natural easily with this rush but think about how much easier it would be to stop with the hatch in your main and a couple spine crawlers at the top of your ramp. You expand to your natural when you're able to without dying, just like P and T have to. You don't see Protoss making 2 gateways at their natural do you? Why should Zerg be able to make a building at their natural with no punishment, this is something I've just never understood why we think we should just automatically get a free expansion, logical just doesn't make sense to me. Nice to see some unbiased posts every now and then. Thank you for being honest and avoiding the bandwagon influence.
Possibly unbiased but certainly not well informed.
Terran will just park bunkers at your natural and laugh as you choke yourself up your own ramp. Zerg needs to defend down their ramp because their units need space, and have early creep to put down spine crawlers and run faster than snail speed.
|
This is bullshit. I hope zerg players do realise that Terran does this kind of rushes because they don't see a better way to respond to 14 hatch and their macro is quite horrible. And you want to nerf it too ?
Ask yourself, do you like a ZvZ fest ?...
|
On November 24 2010 06:17 ckw wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 06:14 The Icon wrote:On November 24 2010 06:05 TonyT123 wrote:
I feel like this is another annoying over reaction to a fast hatch at the natch. As a zerg player i can say it IS necessary to make a second hatch very fucking fast if you dont want to get steamrolled by the first push simply because the hatch is where we make all our units. the fact that the hatch is at the natural is often just out of convenience...ie, we would expand there eventually anyways so it makes more sense to put it there than in the base...really doesn't matter that much. most of those early fast expands never get close to saturated early on...they're for MAKING UNITS. Like offensive units. you don't feel that main your 2nd hatch in the main would be infinitely easier to defend? When I first switched to Zerg that's all I did exactly for the reason that it makes it that much easier to defend. I eventually started 14 hatching at my expo when I started getting better and could defend easier, and continue to do so because so few people are able to properly execute the marine/scv rush and basically just give me a free win. At the very very very top level the players can take down the natural easily with this rush but think about how much easier it would be to stop with the hatch in your main and a couple spine crawlers at the top of your ramp. You expand to your natural when you're able to without dying, just like P and T have to. You don't see Protoss making 2 gateways at their natural do you? Why should Zerg be able to make a building at their natural with no punishment, this is something I've just never understood why we think we should just automatically get a free expansion, logical just doesn't make sense to me. Nice to see some unbiased posts every now and then. Thank you for being honest and avoiding the bandwagon influence.
So disagreeing with you = bandwagoning? cute 
|
On November 24 2010 06:24 Coolcatqt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 06:13 ckw wrote:On November 24 2010 06:10 Jermstuddog wrote:
Ok, here's a little homework for everybody who thinks 14 hatch or any similar opening is advantageous for Zerg.
Open up any high-level ZvT replay that involves a fast hatchery.
Press I and get to the income tab.
Mark down the time at which Zerg overtakes Terran for having a higher income between them.
There will be a tiny blip at the 9-10 worker mark, then zerg starts building structures and he will remain significantly behind in econ until the 8+ minute mark. I guarantee you will find nothing to the contrary.
Feel free to link any replay that proves otherwise right here. This is the same for ANY of the races that would take an expansion that fast. Show ME a replay that proves otherwise. On November 24 2010 06:12 Coolcatqt wrote:On November 24 2010 06:10 Jermstuddog wrote:
Ok, here's a little homework for everybody who thinks 14 hatch or any similar opening is advantageous for Zerg.
Open up any high-level ZvT replay that involves a fast hatchery.
Press I and get to the income tab.
Mark down the time at which Zerg overtakes Terran for having a higher income between them.
There will be a tiny blip at the 9-10 worker mark, then zerg starts building structures and he will remain significantly behind in econ until the 8+ minute mark. I guarantee you will find nothing to the contrary.
Feel free to link any replay that proves otherwise right here. tested this, it is true Keep defending your 1 base allins, Terranwhiners Last time I checked the Terrans weren't the ones whining, you were. lol, how cute. im reading your posts, and they are full of whine :p cute To all the people talking about a free expo, you're obviously scrubs that never played brood war, most balanced game ever and thats how it worked there too unless you were cheesed (Sounds like sc2 huh)
... Nice comparing of SC:BW and SC2. Just one "minor" thing, zerg has got queens and there is no must-build-hatch to be on equal production with other races for a while.
It seems that you want your race to be the ultimate one, like the hybrids in WoL... Won't happen man...
|
On November 24 2010 06:29 LunarC wrote:
Why does everyone insist on going 14 hatch. The overhead of having to produce more drones to saturate leaves you relatively defenseless. It's better to expand off of 13 gas/pool speedlings with a queen, as you can gauge how many lings you need and how many drones you can afford to pump using your initial lings for scouting.
Are you delusional? And every pro zerg in GSL is wrong acording to you.
The reason being is you dont need ANY lings if you hatch first (well you need 2 for scouts, but it could be a drone too) Reason being is creep at natural for spines. 13gas/pool makes you sit at 3 larva having less units and much lower income for a while compared to hatch first.
Overhead of saturating leaves you defenseless is just a joke.... Who is forcing you to saturate both bases before making units?
|
I don't understand why the second in-base hatch isn't given more consideration.
One of the main reasons zerg needs an extra base is so that they have the larvae to make both units and workers. Two in base hatches would be much easier to defend (natural creep spread), and provides you with the opportunity to immediately saturate your natural when you take it.
I'd love to see someone with actual skill try the in-base out. My mid-level diamond theory crafting is only polluting this thread further...
EDIT; http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=155749
|
The funny thing is, a Zerg who goes 14 hatch, and tries to defend, has a much better time defending all the follow ups Terran can throw at you, since a Terran doesnt even have to commit the push.
Wallin at Bottom of the ramp, 2 rax, fake push, pull back before speed kicks in (build bunker @ bottom of their base or smth like that, and go back. Bunkers are Free) Build CC/Starport whatever, and no Zerg before Lair Tech has even a chance to scout what the fuck you are doing up your ramp. He has Income advantage, you have 1 base fuck, wasted larvae/drones on (spines)/Ling/Baneling Nest/Banes (requires 3 drones on gas all the time) and this shit is completely USELESS, since by the time you might bust him he has a double wallin.
|
Come on, you can't expect Zergs to be able to 14 hatch safely every game and not even have to commit to a defense?
That's the price you have to pay for attempting to enter the mid game with a solid lead and I don't see how this is a problem at all seeing that Zergs can definitely hold given the right situation.
|
On November 24 2010 06:35 Durp wrote:I don't understand why the second in-base hatch isn't given more consideration. One of the main reasons zerg needs an extra base is so that they have the larvae to make both units and workers. Two in base hatches would be much easier to defend (natural creep spread), and provides you with the opportunity to immediately saturate your natural when you take it. I'd love to see someone with actual skill try the in-base out. My mid-level diamond theory crafting is only polluting this thread further... EDIT; http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=155749
The reason people don't 2 hatch in their main as zerg is because its completely pointless, you're just delaying tech and your expansion which you need to be on even footing with terran, due to more efficient army + mules. plus they have the option of just bunker containing you then your expansion is even more delayed
since you confessed to being "mid diamond" i'll let your ignorance slide :p
|
people should stop taking some trends so serious.
the game is still in a very early state. new strats and timings pop up all the time, it gets effective and gets abused alot. its just a fotm(/w) thing.dont call doomsday on a matchup just because of a few matches.
even with all the pros and high level play we see the game is still hugely evolving. look at Zs playstyle today which is mostly completly different then what we saw a month ago. give it time before calling "OMG IMBA BORING END OF DAYS IN THIS MACHUP!"
and really sc2 is a) not even close the beeing as figured out as bw is and b) seems to be way more rush/allin friendly and random.its only expected to see stuff like that popup.
|
It seems to me like high level terran player are basically forcing a meta game change by punishing zerg for being greedy. Both are being super greedy and with the terran all-in, it can end right there. I for one as a terran player is terrified of going against a zerg that has gotten 4+bases. Once they get that many bases the baneligns number are just to hard to control and the ultra will start to come. So, once the meta game shift and people stop doing 14 hatch, it should flow better into a longer macro game.
|
Tbh, people talking about 14hatch so much still don't even understand the problem. You still can't hold it off with 14pool 16hatch, and suggesting speedling expand is just awful :p thats a build for bronze bads
|
LOL, this is crazy.. So many pages and still the same thing again again and again. I wonder for how long this will go on.. :DD
|
Yeah the discussion should be about the Terran cheese. Not the 14hatch. The cheese is just as efficient vs 14pool. It forces zerg to stop droning to prepare for the push, and a smart Terran will just go back to his base while the zerg is stuck with useless zerglings and terran is way, way ahead in workers count AND probably forced the zerg to 1base for longer than he wanted to.
It's a win-win situation for the Terran no matter what build the zerg chooses.
|
On November 24 2010 06:04 Greentellon wrote: "YES I KNOW saying "protoss just need to learn and play" is not constructive"
No, I think this is pretty close to the right idea. It's ridiculous to suggest that ANY race knows how to play right now, and if there were any kind of balance issue that required some kind of "emergency" patching, I think it would be evident in hugely skewed numbers in high diamond ladder games. The more subtle imbalances that might exist will take more time to really be evident - there isn't enough data to confidently make claims about balance in this patch other than to say that if the game is broken, it's only a little broken.
|
I watched day 2 gsl as of now, u guys are really complaining about that ? =P
I mean there is a balance this or that team but I haven't seen one replay were one zerg actually lose to it in this thread (replay of YOU losing because of the tatic not bad decision making), and if I do the statics I think the scv + marine rush worked in less than 50% of the games of today's (since korea live in the future) games ....
U zergs should be happy when opponent goes marine + scv, and terran happy when z goes 7rr, this mean free wins ....
|
On November 24 2010 06:35 Durp wrote:I don't understand why the second in-base hatch isn't given more consideration. One of the main reasons zerg needs an extra base is so that they have the larvae to make both units and workers. Two in base hatches would be much easier to defend (natural creep spread), and provides you with the opportunity to immediately saturate your natural when you take it. I'd love to see someone with actual skill try the in-base out. My mid-level diamond theory crafting is only polluting this thread further... EDIT; http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=155749
for 2 reasons
1. the mineral gathering becomes more effective when you split your drones
2. you gain more map control and also the ability to have double the defence since your opponent usually have to destry your natural before coming to your main
|
On November 24 2010 06:08 ckw wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 06:05 TonyT123 wrote:
I feel like this is another annoying over reaction to a fast hatch at the natch. As a zerg player i can say it IS necessary to make a second hatch very fucking fast if you dont want to get steamrolled by the first push simply because the hatch is where we make all our units. the fact that the hatch is at the natural is often just out of convenience...ie, we would expand there eventually anyways so it makes more sense to put it there than in the base...really doesn't matter that much. most of those early fast expands never get close to saturated early on...they're for MAKING UNITS. Like offensive units. I played Zerg until recently as well and I can tell you that in the beginning of release it was impossible to 14 hatch and all the Zergs got a long just fine. I see things like this; the 14 hatch is a cookie and Zergs are the kids who don't want that cookie to be taken away. Sure, you produce units from you'r hatcheries but if it was such an issue making units from 1 hatch then how would builds like the 5 RR be so effective? You have to come up with something better than that man. Also, haven't you ever heard that after an early Zerg expo you can't even support units from both hatcheries because you aren't getting enough minerals so your point is completely invalid until the time in game that you would be making a SAFE expo and actually being able to use the extra larvae. Thats why when you 14 CC you use you'r queens first energy to make a creep tumor and not inject.
except this isnt purely an anti 14 hatch its simply two raxes producing marines, waiting for the opportune moment to allinn or expand.
|
is tvz late game any worse than tvz in bw?
|
On November 24 2010 06:55 weeeee wrote:
is tvz late game any worse than tvz in bw?
There is no TvsZ late game in SC2. There is only GG from Terran once Zerg reaches late game.
|
On November 24 2010 05:56 Coolcatqt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 05:51 FlamingTurd wrote:
Personally I think this new T rush is ridiculously strong and I really hope this gets patched out of existence. /signed. Its a lame strategy and its overpowered
I think Blizzard needs to seriously nerf Zerg. Zerg have won 3 major GOM tournaments (GSL 1, GSL 2, GSL All Star), and now it's 27 Zerg out of 64 players in GSL 3.
I would start with a Roach Nerf - either reduce the range by 0.5 or raise the cost of Roaches. Next, I would raise the cost of hatcheries - Zerg macro is ridiculous for the cheap cost of their armies. Banelings may need a nerf because the amount of micro a Terran has to do to avoid banelings is ridciulous - for Zerg, it's just A-click on a Terran bio army.
|
lol i just saw those cannon plays, funny that the protoss answer to 14 hatch could be photon cannons, lol.
hopefulyl it'll turn into an effective trend.
|
An FE is dangerous as zerg, you are foolish if you expect to get it for free every game. It is risky to throw down a 14 hatch blindly.
Most of the time you can scout early enough to see the second rax, and then just drop a bling nest and be a-ok.
Further, this is not cheese, because it made to counter a specific B/O, and if they see you have enough defense, they can back off and/or not bring scv's.
|
On November 24 2010 06:00 klauz619 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 05:51 FlamingTurd wrote:
Personally I think this new T rush is ridiculously strong and I really hope this gets patched out of existence. Yeah everytime zerg loses a new patch should be addressed so that the zerg who haven't improved at all since beta retains their 65% win rate. Seems to be the trend now.
Try 100% win rate for GOM tournaments. Zerg have won GSL 1, GSL 2, and the GOM All Star invitational. Also, Zerg make up 27 of 64 players at GSL 3.
If that isn't OP, I don't know what is.
|
On November 24 2010 07:06 StarcraftMan wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 06:00 klauz619 wrote:On November 24 2010 05:51 FlamingTurd wrote:
Personally I think this new T rush is ridiculously strong and I really hope this gets patched out of existence. Yeah everytime zerg loses a new patch should be addressed so that the zerg who haven't improved at all since beta retains their 65% win rate. Seems to be the trend now. Try 100% win rate for GOM tournaments. Zerg have won GSL 1, GSL 2, and the GOM All Star invitational. Also, Zerg make up 27 of 64 players at GSL 3. If that isn't OP, I don't know what is.
Yeah and a Terran won IEM, MLG and there were 24 out of 64 players in GSL 3 as terran. If that isn't' close to balanced then I don't' know what is.
|
On November 24 2010 07:08 blade55555 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 07:06 StarcraftMan wrote:On November 24 2010 06:00 klauz619 wrote:On November 24 2010 05:51 FlamingTurd wrote:
Personally I think this new T rush is ridiculously strong and I really hope this gets patched out of existence. Yeah everytime zerg loses a new patch should be addressed so that the zerg who haven't improved at all since beta retains their 65% win rate. Seems to be the trend now. Try 100% win rate for GOM tournaments. Zerg have won GSL 1, GSL 2, and the GOM All Star invitational. Also, Zerg make up 27 of 64 players at GSL 3. If that isn't OP, I don't know what is. Yeah and a Terran won IEM, MLG and there were 24 out of 64 players in GSL 3 as terran. If that isn't' close to balanced then I don't' know what is.
That's like comparing the olympics to college football.
|
On November 24 2010 07:08 blade55555 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 07:06 StarcraftMan wrote:On November 24 2010 06:00 klauz619 wrote:On November 24 2010 05:51 FlamingTurd wrote:
Personally I think this new T rush is ridiculously strong and I really hope this gets patched out of existence. Yeah everytime zerg loses a new patch should be addressed so that the zerg who haven't improved at all since beta retains their 65% win rate. Seems to be the trend now. Try 100% win rate for GOM tournaments. Zerg have won GSL 1, GSL 2, and the GOM All Star invitational. Also, Zerg make up 27 of 64 players at GSL 3. If that isn't OP, I don't know what is. Yeah and a Terran won IEM, MLG and there were 24 out of 64 players in GSL 3 as terran. If that isn't' close to balanced then I don't' know what is.
IEM and MLG are totally the same level tournaments as the GSL and GOM All Star Invitational. Also, while there may be 24 Terran players compared to 27 zerg, that's not even considering the fact that so many more Terran and Protoss players tried out, compared to Zerg.
|
such a lame way to play, allinning every game...pretty boring to watch.
btw, call it Bankrush please - too big to fail.
And about that 100% win rate in GOM tournaments:
Fruitdealer VASTLY outplayed every terran there, partly because of their lack of training in ZvT.
NesTea adapted to the extremely cheesy and allin playstyle of FoxeR, which led to his failure.
I dont see any imbalance there, just a superior ability to adapt.
|
On November 24 2010 07:06 StarcraftMan wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 06:00 klauz619 wrote:On November 24 2010 05:51 FlamingTurd wrote:
Personally I think this new T rush is ridiculously strong and I really hope this gets patched out of existence. Yeah everytime zerg loses a new patch should be addressed so that the zerg who haven't improved at all since beta retains their 65% win rate. Seems to be the trend now. Try 100% win rate for GOM tournaments. Zerg have won GSL 1, GSL 2, and the GOM All Star invitational. Also, Zerg make up 27 of 64 players at GSL 3. If that isn't OP, I don't know what is.
3 tournaments is an incredibly small sample size. The number of players at a single GSL event is an incredibly small sample size.
No real conclusions can be drawn from these statistics.
|
I still don't see zergs use spine crawlers as much as they should. You can drop 3 and even if he doesn't build a single marines you can use those crawlers later to great effect.
|
If zerg expand early, that's economy play.
If a terran goes all in, that's.. an all in.
All in > economy play. Simple?
If it DIDNT work that way, THEN something would be wrong. As it stands, I think current TvZ is quite balanced.
|
ive watched alot of replays and i dont really see how its that good. its not particularly hard to scout and if u do its ez to stop.
its only bad if u dont scout it and dont prepare at all for it.
|
On November 24 2010 07:19 andrewwiggin wrote:
If zerg expand early, that's economy play.
If a terran goes all in, that's.. an all in.
All in > economy play. Simple?
If it DIDNT work that way, THEN something would be wrong. As it stands, I think current TvZ is quite balanced.
actually, you need that fast hatch for macro to stay even and/or ahead of terran - hatch before 20 food is rather mandatory if you plan on playing longer than 10 minutes
|
On November 24 2010 07:19 andrewwiggin wrote:
If zerg expand early, that's economy play.
If a terran goes all in, that's.. an all in.
All in > economy play. Simple?
If it DIDNT work that way, THEN something would be wrong. As it stands, I think current TvZ is quite balanced.
WILL PEOPLE STOP THINKING THE TERRAN ALL-IN IS ONLY AGAINST A FAST EXPAND?
Like Idra said earlier in the thread, this new T style is very hard to defend if you go 14gas/14pool -> speed. 7-8 marines can pop into your base before speed has even finished.
It's incredibly strong against anything the zerg wants to do, it's incredibly flexible for the terran, and it's completely unscoutable.
|
Why people mistake having to have 2 hatcheries with having to have 1 expansion ?
|
On November 24 2010 07:23 Thetan wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 07:19 andrewwiggin wrote:
If zerg expand early, that's economy play.
If a terran goes all in, that's.. an all in.
All in > economy play. Simple?
If it DIDNT work that way, THEN something would be wrong. As it stands, I think current TvZ is quite balanced. WILL PEOPLE STOP THINKING THE TERRAN ALL-IN IS ONLY AGAINST A FAST EXPAND? Like Idra said earlier in the thread, this new T style is very hard to defend if you go 14gas/14pool -> speed. 7-8 marines can pop into your base before speed has even finished. It's incredibly strong against anything the zerg wants to do, it's incredibly flexible for the terran, and it's completely unscoutable.
i have never seen it against something else. point out some games please?
|
On November 24 2010 06:15 Phrencys wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 05:51 FlamingTurd wrote:
Personally I think this new T rush is ridiculously strong and I really hope this gets patched out of existence. Another crippling factor is how every single tier1 unit need Lair to have a decent moving speed off-creep. Combine that with the fact T can wall-off safely there's no wonder why every single zerg is expected to make 40 drones before making anything else. Zerg is pinned in his base by design, and it doesn't even have the necessary mechanics to have a proper early defense.
Roaches have 2.25 speed, Banelings 2.5 and hydralisks 2.25. Zealots and sentries are both 2.25 as are both marines and marauders. Creep speed is such a huge "taken for granted" benefit. People always complain about how slow hydras are off-creep. That's only because zerg players are so used to their units being so dang fast! Try using the slow (2.25) zealot with 0 range before you complain about slow units...
People drive me nuts when they complain about the necessary apm to spread creep. It gives you speed/vision/prevents buildings by other races and is FREE!
/Rant
|
How is it unscoutable? The 2 rax are down before any Marines are out. Hell, in every GSL game we've seen it used so far the Zerg has scouted it, not that it isn't getting to the point where you can basically blind counter it because it's becoming so common.
|
Its really ez to stop imo. Build a spinecrawler in the main while ur natural hatchery is building and u should be fine
|
On November 24 2010 07:30 busdriver wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 06:15 Phrencys wrote:On November 24 2010 05:51 FlamingTurd wrote:
Personally I think this new T rush is ridiculously strong and I really hope this gets patched out of existence. Another crippling factor is how every single tier1 unit need Lair to have a decent moving speed off-creep. Combine that with the fact T can wall-off safely there's no wonder why every single zerg is expected to make 40 drones before making anything else. Zerg is pinned in his base by design, and it doesn't even have the necessary mechanics to have a proper early defense. Roaches have 2.25 speed, Banelings 2.5 and hydralisks 2.25. Zealots and sentries are both 2.25 as are both marines and marauders. Creep speed is such a huge "taken for granted" benefit. People always complain about how slow hydras are off-creep. That's only because zerg players are so used to their units being so dang fast! Try using the slow (2.25) zealot with 0 range before you complain about slow units... People drive me nuts when they complain about the necessary apm to spread creep. It gives you speed/vision/prevents buildings by other races and is FREE! /Rant
But the fact that zerg can't wall, cast FF's, or have really strong AOE defenders (siege tanks, PF), means that they NEED mobility to be able to both be aggressive and be able to defend their own base.
|
On November 24 2010 07:24 noD wrote:
Why people mistake having to have 2 hatcheries with having to have 1 expansion ?
Exactly. Zerg may need 2 hatches to keep up with unit production, but they don't need 2 "bases" (defined as hatcheries on minerals). Two "bases" that early gives zerg a dominated economic advantage. Terran has to make multiple barracks/factories/starports while protoss has to make multiple gateways/robos/stargates. I don't think it's unfair that zerg should have to make multiple hatcheries to keep up without getting an automatic 2nd base. By all means take a FE, but don't think you deserve to get it without risk.
|
I've been messing around with 2 rax play for a while now, and I don't ever do the all-in garbage that Korean Terrans seem to love just because they saw FoxeR do it. I use the initial around 8 marines to put on pressure which buys time to get a 3rd rax, add-ons on each of the barracks and an expansion down.
It's a really strong opener that doesn't HAVE to do damage to justify it. You simply delay your gas until after your second barracks and from there you can play pretty standard.
|
On November 24 2010 07:23 Thetan wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 07:19 andrewwiggin wrote:
If zerg expand early, that's economy play.
If a terran goes all in, that's.. an all in.
All in > economy play. Simple?
If it DIDNT work that way, THEN something would be wrong. As it stands, I think current TvZ is quite balanced. WILL PEOPLE STOP THINKING THE TERRAN ALL-IN IS ONLY AGAINST A FAST EXPAND? Like Idra said earlier in the thread, this new T style is very hard to defend if you go 14gas/14pool -> speed. 7-8 marines can pop into your base before speed has even finished. It's incredibly strong against anything the zerg wants to do, it's incredibly flexible for the terran, and it's completely unscoutable.
Idra is a subpar Zerg player in GSL, End of Story. Fruitdealer and Kyrix had no issues defending against the best Terran 14 hatch rusher - Foxer.
Don't quote subpar zerg players that have yet to win the GSL or GOM All Star Invitational.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On November 24 2010 07:16 Thetan wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 07:06 StarcraftMan wrote:On November 24 2010 06:00 klauz619 wrote:On November 24 2010 05:51 FlamingTurd wrote:
Personally I think this new T rush is ridiculously strong and I really hope this gets patched out of existence. Yeah everytime zerg loses a new patch should be addressed so that the zerg who haven't improved at all since beta retains their 65% win rate. Seems to be the trend now. Try 100% win rate for GOM tournaments. Zerg have won GSL 1, GSL 2, and the GOM All Star invitational. Also, Zerg make up 27 of 64 players at GSL 3. If that isn't OP, I don't know what is. 3 tournaments is an incredibly small sample size. The number of players at a single GSL event is an incredibly small sample size. No real conclusions can be drawn from these statistics.
6000 people trying out in the preliminaries is a small sample all right.
|
On November 24 2010 07:15 Sideburn wrote:
IEM and MLG are totally the same level tournaments as the GSL and GOM All Star Invitational.
^^^
ROFL! Quote of the day!
|
On November 24 2010 07:38 StarcraftMan wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 07:23 Thetan wrote:On November 24 2010 07:19 andrewwiggin wrote:
If zerg expand early, that's economy play.
If a terran goes all in, that's.. an all in.
All in > economy play. Simple?
If it DIDNT work that way, THEN something would be wrong. As it stands, I think current TvZ is quite balanced. WILL PEOPLE STOP THINKING THE TERRAN ALL-IN IS ONLY AGAINST A FAST EXPAND? Like Idra said earlier in the thread, this new T style is very hard to defend if you go 14gas/14pool -> speed. 7-8 marines can pop into your base before speed has even finished. It's incredibly strong against anything the zerg wants to do, it's incredibly flexible for the terran, and it's completely unscoutable. Idra is a subpar Zerg player in GSL, End of Story. Fruitdealer and Kyrix had no issues defending against the best Terran 14 hatch rusher - Foxer. Don't quote subpar zerg players that have yet to win the GSL or GOM All Star Invitational.
so idra isnt a valid source but you are? sounds.... weird?
i dont even care about this topic cause as i said earlier people really need to stop overreacting to some fotm trend. but your post makes no sense.
On November 24 2010 07:41 klauz619 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 07:16 Thetan wrote:On November 24 2010 07:06 StarcraftMan wrote:On November 24 2010 06:00 klauz619 wrote:On November 24 2010 05:51 FlamingTurd wrote:
Personally I think this new T rush is ridiculously strong and I really hope this gets patched out of existence. Yeah everytime zerg loses a new patch should be addressed so that the zerg who haven't improved at all since beta retains their 65% win rate. Seems to be the trend now. Try 100% win rate for GOM tournaments. Zerg have won GSL 1, GSL 2, and the GOM All Star invitational. Also, Zerg make up 27 of 64 players at GSL 3. If that isn't OP, I don't know what is. 3 tournaments is an incredibly small sample size. The number of players at a single GSL event is an incredibly small sample size. No real conclusions can be drawn from these statistics. 6000 people trying out in the preliminaries is a small sample all right.
what has this to do with players in the gsl which are 64? and the prelims are damn random. thats why great players like nada,tester and huk arent qualifying while there are random 2k players in that get horrible face stomped in the ro64
|
On November 24 2010 07:23 Thetan wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 07:19 andrewwiggin wrote:
If zerg expand early, that's economy play.
If a terran goes all in, that's.. an all in.
All in > economy play. Simple?
If it DIDNT work that way, THEN something would be wrong. As it stands, I think current TvZ is quite balanced. WILL PEOPLE STOP THINKING THE TERRAN ALL-IN IS ONLY AGAINST A FAST EXPAND? Like Idra said earlier in the thread, this new T style is very hard to defend if you go 14gas/14pool -> speed. 7-8 marines can pop into your base before speed has even finished. It's incredibly strong against anything the zerg wants to do, it's incredibly flexible for the terran, and it's completely unscoutable.
Lol, repeating what IdrA said in a different order doesn't make you seem smart, it also doesn't make it true. In fact, looking at your posts it doesn't seem like you've played against this style at all and are just arguing because you're a Zerg player.
Saying it is unscoutable, unlimitingly flexible and a counter to everything Zerg does is just a silly way to show you've been brainwashed by Artosis
|
On November 24 2010 07:46 Saechiis wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 07:23 Thetan wrote:On November 24 2010 07:19 andrewwiggin wrote:
If zerg expand early, that's economy play.
If a terran goes all in, that's.. an all in.
All in > economy play. Simple?
If it DIDNT work that way, THEN something would be wrong. As it stands, I think current TvZ is quite balanced. WILL PEOPLE STOP THINKING THE TERRAN ALL-IN IS ONLY AGAINST A FAST EXPAND? Like Idra said earlier in the thread, this new T style is very hard to defend if you go 14gas/14pool -> speed. 7-8 marines can pop into your base before speed has even finished. It's incredibly strong against anything the zerg wants to do, it's incredibly flexible for the terran, and it's completely unscoutable. Lol, repeating what IdrA said in a different order doesn't make you seem smart, it also doesn't make it true. In fact, looking at your posts it doesn't seem like you've played against this style at all and are just arguing because you're a Zerg player. Saying it is unscoutable, unlimitingly flexible and a counter to everything Zerg does is just a silly way to show you've been brainwashed by Artosis
I brought it up because people were arguing a completely different point. And I trust Idra's opinion way more than the random posters in the forum.
The point is that using this build, Terran can react to whatever zerg is doing. If there's an opening, Terran has the capabilities do critical damage. And if there isn't an opening, Terran can get their expansion down first as zerg was being mega defensive.
It's not an EASY build for Terran (as knowledge of when to push out and with how many SCV's takes alot of skill), but from what i've seen and read that if done right makes it EXTREMELY difficult for zerg
|
On November 24 2010 07:44 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 07:38 StarcraftMan wrote:On November 24 2010 07:23 Thetan wrote:On November 24 2010 07:19 andrewwiggin wrote:
If zerg expand early, that's economy play.
If a terran goes all in, that's.. an all in.
All in > economy play. Simple?
If it DIDNT work that way, THEN something would be wrong. As it stands, I think current TvZ is quite balanced. WILL PEOPLE STOP THINKING THE TERRAN ALL-IN IS ONLY AGAINST A FAST EXPAND? Like Idra said earlier in the thread, this new T style is very hard to defend if you go 14gas/14pool -> speed. 7-8 marines can pop into your base before speed has even finished. It's incredibly strong against anything the zerg wants to do, it's incredibly flexible for the terran, and it's completely unscoutable. Idra is a subpar Zerg player in GSL, End of Story. Fruitdealer and Kyrix had no issues defending against the best Terran 14 hatch rusher - Foxer. Don't quote subpar zerg players that have yet to win the GSL or GOM All Star Invitational. so idra isnt a valid source but you are? sounds.... weird? i dont even care about this topic cause as i said earlier people really need to stop overreacting to some fotm trend. but your post makes no sense. Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 07:41 klauz619 wrote:On November 24 2010 07:16 Thetan wrote:On November 24 2010 07:06 StarcraftMan wrote:On November 24 2010 06:00 klauz619 wrote:On November 24 2010 05:51 FlamingTurd wrote:
Personally I think this new T rush is ridiculously strong and I really hope this gets patched out of existence. Yeah everytime zerg loses a new patch should be addressed so that the zerg who haven't improved at all since beta retains their 65% win rate. Seems to be the trend now. Try 100% win rate for GOM tournaments. Zerg have won GSL 1, GSL 2, and the GOM All Star invitational. Also, Zerg make up 27 of 64 players at GSL 3. If that isn't OP, I don't know what is. 3 tournaments is an incredibly small sample size. The number of players at a single GSL event is an incredibly small sample size. No real conclusions can be drawn from these statistics. 6000 people trying out in the preliminaries is a small sample all right. what has this to do with players in the gsl which are 64? and the prelims are damn random. thats why great players like nada,tester and huk arent qualifying while there are random 2k players in that get horrible face stomped in the ro64
So it's "random" and "unreliable" and not becase "huk got his ass kicked by better players in the preliminaries".
good thinkin.
|
On November 24 2010 07:56 Thetan wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 07:46 Saechiis wrote:On November 24 2010 07:23 Thetan wrote:On November 24 2010 07:19 andrewwiggin wrote:
If zerg expand early, that's economy play.
If a terran goes all in, that's.. an all in.
All in > economy play. Simple?
If it DIDNT work that way, THEN something would be wrong. As it stands, I think current TvZ is quite balanced. WILL PEOPLE STOP THINKING THE TERRAN ALL-IN IS ONLY AGAINST A FAST EXPAND? Like Idra said earlier in the thread, this new T style is very hard to defend if you go 14gas/14pool -> speed. 7-8 marines can pop into your base before speed has even finished. It's incredibly strong against anything the zerg wants to do, it's incredibly flexible for the terran, and it's completely unscoutable. Lol, repeating what IdrA said in a different order doesn't make you seem smart, it also doesn't make it true. In fact, looking at your posts it doesn't seem like you've played against this style at all and are just arguing because you're a Zerg player. Saying it is unscoutable, unlimitingly flexible and a counter to everything Zerg does is just a silly way to show you've been brainwashed by Artosis I brought it up because people were arguing a completely different point. And I trust Idra's opinion way more than the random posters in the forum. The point is that using this build, Terran can react to whatever zerg is doing. If there's an opening, Terran has the capabilities do critical damage. And if there isn't an opening, Terran can get their expansion down first as zerg was being mega defensive. It's not an EASY build for Terran (as knowledge of when to push out and with how many SCV's takes alot of skill), but from what i've seen and read that if done right makes it EXTREMELY difficult for zerg
Difficult to hold your 14 hatch / free expansion, oh noes. We feel sorry for you guys.
It's more difficult for us to hold our 14 CC/ Nexus.
|
On November 24 2010 07:57 DooMDash wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 07:56 Thetan wrote:On November 24 2010 07:46 Saechiis wrote:On November 24 2010 07:23 Thetan wrote:On November 24 2010 07:19 andrewwiggin wrote:
If zerg expand early, that's economy play.
If a terran goes all in, that's.. an all in.
All in > economy play. Simple?
If it DIDNT work that way, THEN something would be wrong. As it stands, I think current TvZ is quite balanced. WILL PEOPLE STOP THINKING THE TERRAN ALL-IN IS ONLY AGAINST A FAST EXPAND? Like Idra said earlier in the thread, this new T style is very hard to defend if you go 14gas/14pool -> speed. 7-8 marines can pop into your base before speed has even finished. It's incredibly strong against anything the zerg wants to do, it's incredibly flexible for the terran, and it's completely unscoutable. Lol, repeating what IdrA said in a different order doesn't make you seem smart, it also doesn't make it true. In fact, looking at your posts it doesn't seem like you've played against this style at all and are just arguing because you're a Zerg player. Saying it is unscoutable, unlimitingly flexible and a counter to everything Zerg does is just a silly way to show you've been brainwashed by Artosis I brought it up because people were arguing a completely different point. And I trust Idra's opinion way more than the random posters in the forum. The point is that using this build, Terran can react to whatever zerg is doing. If there's an opening, Terran has the capabilities do critical damage. And if there isn't an opening, Terran can get their expansion down first as zerg was being mega defensive. It's not an EASY build for Terran (as knowledge of when to push out and with how many SCV's takes alot of skill), but from what i've seen and read that if done right makes it EXTREMELY difficult for zerg Difficult to hold your 14 hatch / free expansion, oh noes. We feel sorry for you guys.
Once again, it's not just 14 hatch. Even with 14gas/14pool Terran can still put on craptons of pressure and either win the game or come out ahead in worker count.
|
On November 24 2010 07:16 Thetan wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 07:06 StarcraftMan wrote:On November 24 2010 06:00 klauz619 wrote:On November 24 2010 05:51 FlamingTurd wrote:
Personally I think this new T rush is ridiculously strong and I really hope this gets patched out of existence. Yeah everytime zerg loses a new patch should be addressed so that the zerg who haven't improved at all since beta retains their 65% win rate. Seems to be the trend now. Try 100% win rate for GOM tournaments. Zerg have won GSL 1, GSL 2, and the GOM All Star invitational. Also, Zerg make up 27 of 64 players at GSL 3. If that isn't OP, I don't know what is. 3 tournaments is an incredibly small sample size. The number of players at a single GSL event is an incredibly small sample size. No real conclusions can be drawn from these statistics.
yeah, you haven't taken a statistics course, have you? With the number of players we've had in all 3 GSLs, there are more than enough players to draw conclusions from the statistics.
|
Its another cheesy all in build. Now every Terran will do it against Zerg to stop the game from progressing past SCVs and marines vs drones and zerglings... Great, now I get to play extremely short games 1/3 of the time. Everyone who copies this is sad too, one base all in pushes are becoming too popular and ruining this game. People care too much about winning and don't want to play the game.
|
On November 24 2010 07:59 Sideburn wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 07:16 Thetan wrote:On November 24 2010 07:06 StarcraftMan wrote:On November 24 2010 06:00 klauz619 wrote:On November 24 2010 05:51 FlamingTurd wrote:
Personally I think this new T rush is ridiculously strong and I really hope this gets patched out of existence. Yeah everytime zerg loses a new patch should be addressed so that the zerg who haven't improved at all since beta retains their 65% win rate. Seems to be the trend now. Try 100% win rate for GOM tournaments. Zerg have won GSL 1, GSL 2, and the GOM All Star invitational. Also, Zerg make up 27 of 64 players at GSL 3. If that isn't OP, I don't know what is. 3 tournaments is an incredibly small sample size. The number of players at a single GSL event is an incredibly small sample size. No real conclusions can be drawn from these statistics. yeah, you haven't taken a statistics course, have you? With the number of players we've had in all 3 GSLs, there are more than enough players to draw conclusions from the statistics.
Not if, as the post i was responding to was, you are only looking at the WINNERS of the GSL (which has a sample size of 3) and at the race distribution of only GSL 3. I haven't seen data on W-L% by race in the GSL overall (though that data would be interesting).
|
On November 24 2010 05:42 klauz619 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 05:41 DooMDash wrote:
I think people are a little bit brain-washed by Artosis's biased commentary. He's obviously a Zerg player and makes it sound like Zerg always has problems and T should always be winning because how powerful their desperate all in is. The guy will stop crying and be biased when he wins 1st place. Which will never happen since he doesn't even break through preliminaries. should just use jason lee + idra to replace him. Idras biased as hell but he barely speaks so it balances out.
you sir are my hero.
i like artosis work, but his childish behavior ("uhhh I am not a progamer so Zerg must be weak" or " uhhhh I am to dumb to build a turret or a scanner or to lay mines so DTs are imbalanced") pisses me off and the sad thing is all these wc3 kids and FPS kids joining the community and seeing his whiny behavior copy it 1 to 1.
artosis STOP playing you will never be good enough to be a star. just focus on casting and casting needs objectivity!
@ topic
I dont use the 2 rax + pull scv build, because it just doesnt look good for me. in all honestly pulling scvs and going 2 rax to have a 50% chance to punish a hatch first build looks just totally stupid in my opinion. I just say BBS in sc1 vs hatch first and no scout was like a 95% win. Thats a build where I would take the risks of ending way behind.
I will keep playing the harass into expand style, because the longer the game gets the more chances I will have that a bad Zerg will make mistakes. Hell I will still lose against equal skilled Zergs but with the way the MM works I should win at least 51%-55% and this is way better than 50% even against super, super bad Zergs.
|
blind baneling nest with first 50 gas after speed, and a spine or two in key spots. every game until this nonsense stops. i havent lost to marines in a few days. 1750 diamond.
if for some reason they dont push with marines -> 2 base banelings, scout for banshee. works very well for me. just make drones strategically (i rally mine to my main) and try to get the towers so u can see marines rallied to your base (go pick them off with lings).
this puts the terran in somewhat of a bind. if they went more then 2 barracks (terrans never have an expo if they are rushing marines, if they try to expo u should autowin) they are almost commited to bio, in which case i will roflstomp. a transition to blue flame hellions can be bad tho. i would rather see tanks come out of that factory. just make lings not banelings in that case.
|
On November 24 2010 08:04 Vaporized wrote:
blind baneling nest with first 50 gas after speed, and a spine or two in key spots. every game until this nonsense stops. i havent lost to marines in a few days. 1750 diamond. if for some reason they dont push with marines -> 2 base banelings, scout for banshee. works very well for me.
this puts the terran in somewhat of a bind. if they went more then 2 barracks (terrans never have an expo if they are rushing marines) they are almost commited to bio, in which case i will roflstomp. a transition to blue flame hellions can be bad tho. i would rather see tanks come out of that factory. just make lings not banelings in that case.
The problem with THIS build is that the terran DOES expo while pumping marines out of 2 rax
|
On November 24 2010 08:01 Thetan wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 07:59 Sideburn wrote:On November 24 2010 07:16 Thetan wrote:On November 24 2010 07:06 StarcraftMan wrote:On November 24 2010 06:00 klauz619 wrote:On November 24 2010 05:51 FlamingTurd wrote:
Personally I think this new T rush is ridiculously strong and I really hope this gets patched out of existence. Yeah everytime zerg loses a new patch should be addressed so that the zerg who haven't improved at all since beta retains their 65% win rate. Seems to be the trend now. Try 100% win rate for GOM tournaments. Zerg have won GSL 1, GSL 2, and the GOM All Star invitational. Also, Zerg make up 27 of 64 players at GSL 3. If that isn't OP, I don't know what is. 3 tournaments is an incredibly small sample size. The number of players at a single GSL event is an incredibly small sample size. No real conclusions can be drawn from these statistics. yeah, you haven't taken a statistics course, have you? With the number of players we've had in all 3 GSLs, there are more than enough players to draw conclusions from the statistics. Not if, as the post i was responding to was, you are only looking at the WINNERS of the GSL (which has a sample size of 3) and at the race distribution of only GSL 3. I haven't seen data on W-L% by race in the GSL overall (though that data would be interesting).
True, if you are looking at only the winners, you can hardly draw any conclusions about trends, though that won't stop people from trying. You can only say things like, "It CAN be done."
The W-L% are out there, and they are interesting. Especially looking at them from season to season, to see how things are changing. Season 2 was grim for toss, IIRC.
|
Dominican Republic913 Posts
i think zerg should, do its fast roachwarren and after 2-3 roach get the expo with some ling coming too, but at the same time this is a trouble bc terran can just keep macroing while u play defensive
|
On November 24 2010 07:46 Saechiis wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 07:23 Thetan wrote:On November 24 2010 07:19 andrewwiggin wrote:
If zerg expand early, that's economy play.
If a terran goes all in, that's.. an all in.
All in > economy play. Simple?
If it DIDNT work that way, THEN something would be wrong. As it stands, I think current TvZ is quite balanced. WILL PEOPLE STOP THINKING THE TERRAN ALL-IN IS ONLY AGAINST A FAST EXPAND? Like Idra said earlier in the thread, this new T style is very hard to defend if you go 14gas/14pool -> speed. 7-8 marines can pop into your base before speed has even finished. It's incredibly strong against anything the zerg wants to do, it's incredibly flexible for the terran, and it's completely unscoutable. Lol, repeating what IdrA said in a different order doesn't make you seem smart, it also doesn't make it true. In fact, looking at your posts it doesn't seem like you've played against this style at all and are just arguing because you're a Zerg player. Saying it is unscoutable, unlimitingly flexible and a counter to everything Zerg does is just a silly way to show you've been brainwashed by Artosis
Its unscoutable because once he has 2 rax up and marines at his choke, drones and lings aren't getting up the ramp to take a look, and with 2 rax hes going to have enough marines to cover OL flyovers easily, the rest comes down to smart building placement.
The build is difficult because if a zerg sees 2 rax, he pretty much HAS to get a baneling nest and some Zerglings and speed which cuts significantly into drone production. On the other hand the T can (and should) scan, see the Crawlers/Banelings/Speedlings and from there can simply not allin, the damage has been done and the T can transition into midgame with a significant advantage.
|
On November 24 2010 08:07 Thetan wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 08:04 Vaporized wrote:
blind baneling nest with first 50 gas after speed, and a spine or two in key spots. every game until this nonsense stops. i havent lost to marines in a few days. 1750 diamond. if for some reason they dont push with marines -> 2 base banelings, scout for banshee. works very well for me.
this puts the terran in somewhat of a bind. if they went more then 2 barracks (terrans never have an expo if they are rushing marines) they are almost commited to bio, in which case i will roflstomp. a transition to blue flame hellions can be bad tho. i would rather see tanks come out of that factory. just make lings not banelings in that case. The problem with THIS build is that the terran DOES expo while pumping marines out of 2 rax
now that i think about it one guy on metal made his barracks at his expo and expo'd fairly quickly. i defended like i described, and eventually with 2 base banelings i had enough bling to kill 2 bunkers, some marine maruader, and so many left over they instantly evaporated the expo command center. wish i saved that replay, just played it a few hours ago. maybe the terrans i play suck (possible, sure), but marine rushes are very predictable and in my experience, punishable.
you dont need many drones to constantly make zerglings, and 2 gasses (sometimes i get 3) mining is enough over a few minutes to instantly morph 30-40 banelings when u are ready to push.
edit: this is all in (well as all in as u could be with an expansion) for me. if the terran is doing something other then marine rush then you adjust accordingly.
and a blind baneling nest doesnt bother me at all. if i never use it fine, it was 100 minerals, 50 gas well spent towards my early game peace of mind. but lets be honest banelings are a core unit zvt.
|
On November 24 2010 08:19 Vaporized wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 08:07 Thetan wrote:On November 24 2010 08:04 Vaporized wrote:
blind baneling nest with first 50 gas after speed, and a spine or two in key spots. every game until this nonsense stops. i havent lost to marines in a few days. 1750 diamond. if for some reason they dont push with marines -> 2 base banelings, scout for banshee. works very well for me.
this puts the terran in somewhat of a bind. if they went more then 2 barracks (terrans never have an expo if they are rushing marines) they are almost commited to bio, in which case i will roflstomp. a transition to blue flame hellions can be bad tho. i would rather see tanks come out of that factory. just make lings not banelings in that case. The problem with THIS build is that the terran DOES expo while pumping marines out of 2 rax now that i think about it one guy on metal made his barracks at his expo and expo'd fairly quickly. i defended like i described, and eventually with 2 base banelings i had enough bling to kill 2 bunkers, some marine maruader, and so many left over they instantly evaporated the expo command center. wish i saved that replay, just played it a few hours ago. maybe the terrans i play suck (possible, sure), but marine rushes are very predictable and in my experience, punishable. you dont need many drones to constantly make zerglings, and 2 gasses (sometimes i get 3) mining is enough over a few minutes to instantly morph 30-40 banelings when u are ready to push.
I have a feeling you aren't playing anywhere near a high level if you have 750-1000 gas and min floating to devote to banelings
|
On November 24 2010 07:56 klauz619 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 07:44 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:On November 24 2010 07:38 StarcraftMan wrote:On November 24 2010 07:23 Thetan wrote:On November 24 2010 07:19 andrewwiggin wrote:
If zerg expand early, that's economy play.
If a terran goes all in, that's.. an all in.
All in > economy play. Simple?
If it DIDNT work that way, THEN something would be wrong. As it stands, I think current TvZ is quite balanced. WILL PEOPLE STOP THINKING THE TERRAN ALL-IN IS ONLY AGAINST A FAST EXPAND? Like Idra said earlier in the thread, this new T style is very hard to defend if you go 14gas/14pool -> speed. 7-8 marines can pop into your base before speed has even finished. It's incredibly strong against anything the zerg wants to do, it's incredibly flexible for the terran, and it's completely unscoutable. Idra is a subpar Zerg player in GSL, End of Story. Fruitdealer and Kyrix had no issues defending against the best Terran 14 hatch rusher - Foxer. Don't quote subpar zerg players that have yet to win the GSL or GOM All Star Invitational. so idra isnt a valid source but you are? sounds.... weird? i dont even care about this topic cause as i said earlier people really need to stop overreacting to some fotm trend. but your post makes no sense. On November 24 2010 07:41 klauz619 wrote:On November 24 2010 07:16 Thetan wrote:On November 24 2010 07:06 StarcraftMan wrote:On November 24 2010 06:00 klauz619 wrote:On November 24 2010 05:51 FlamingTurd wrote:
Personally I think this new T rush is ridiculously strong and I really hope this gets patched out of existence. Yeah everytime zerg loses a new patch should be addressed so that the zerg who haven't improved at all since beta retains their 65% win rate. Seems to be the trend now. Try 100% win rate for GOM tournaments. Zerg have won GSL 1, GSL 2, and the GOM All Star invitational. Also, Zerg make up 27 of 64 players at GSL 3. If that isn't OP, I don't know what is. 3 tournaments is an incredibly small sample size. The number of players at a single GSL event is an incredibly small sample size. No real conclusions can be drawn from these statistics. 6000 people trying out in the preliminaries is a small sample all right. what has this to do with players in the gsl which are 64? and the prelims are damn random. thats why great players like nada,tester and huk arent qualifying while there are random 2k players in that get horrible face stomped in the ro64 So it's "random" and "unreliable" and not becase "huk got his ass kicked by better players in the preliminaries". good thinkin.
exactly. or do you really think those random guys that totally get owned in the ro64 (and there even were some in the gsl that were mediocre on the ladder) are BETTER PLAYERS then nada/tester/huk ?
a better player can easily lose a bo3 to a worse player. esp in sc2 with countless cheeses and allins in all matchups in addition to huge map imbalances.
look at idra @ last mlg. or imagine ret faced zergbong&genius instead of some randoms in his bracket, he couldve played exactly as good as he did now but maybe would be out. what do you call that if not "random" or "chance"?
also i never said anything about huk not getting beaten by a better player. i just said that the prelims are somewhat random , both from actual games and the brackets.
|
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
On November 24 2010 07:59 Sideburn wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 07:16 Thetan wrote:On November 24 2010 07:06 StarcraftMan wrote:On November 24 2010 06:00 klauz619 wrote:On November 24 2010 05:51 FlamingTurd wrote:
Personally I think this new T rush is ridiculously strong and I really hope this gets patched out of existence. Yeah everytime zerg loses a new patch should be addressed so that the zerg who haven't improved at all since beta retains their 65% win rate. Seems to be the trend now. Try 100% win rate for GOM tournaments. Zerg have won GSL 1, GSL 2, and the GOM All Star invitational. Also, Zerg make up 27 of 64 players at GSL 3. If that isn't OP, I don't know what is. 3 tournaments is an incredibly small sample size. The number of players at a single GSL event is an incredibly small sample size. No real conclusions can be drawn from these statistics. yeah, you haven't taken a statistics course, have you? With the number of players we've had in all 3 GSLs, there are more than enough players to draw conclusions from the statistics.
It's important to realize that we're not analyzing data here, we're actually looking at trends. The real data happens in the ladder, and then these players get the impression that terran cannot win in a long game, and zerg has incredible difficulty winning a rush game. Hence these trends manifest themselves in the GSL games. We don't need to look at every TvZ these guys play on the ladder, we can look at what builds they go for when their tournament life depends on it, and that's good enough as an indicator than anything else.
The problem is not this early game terran cheese. The actual problem is that terrans do not believe they can win in the late-game against zerg, and so their only recourse is to do these 10-15 minute timing attacks. If terran felt comfortable in the late-game, then they would be less inclined to risk everything on cheese every series.
So the problem is not that this cheese occurs, cheese should be allowed to occur, and is a powerful disincentive against certain types of play. Cheese is powerful but also needs to be fragile. As NewDawn demonstrated, it can be held off comfortably. If terrans figured out or were given more late-game viability, then they would not play such risky games.
EDIT: Actually, I should be more careful with my terms. This is an all-in, but not a cheese, seeing as zergs seem to have trouble with it even when they see it coming.
|
This is stupid, there has to be a way terran can stop hatchery first or else its like zerg gets a free base in every matchup. The only problem I have is the supply before depot nerf which doesn't let terran cheese ever. If you call this cheese your very wrong because its more of an all-in because if you fail your so behind 2 bases vs 1 and the loss in scvs..
|
You can very easily scout that they're not getting gas until way after their orbital starts, once the rine is out chain steal gas and count the rines.
If they're not getting 13 gas they're not going banshee or hellion.
|
Well, so far :
+ Show Spoiler +
ZvT 2/4
ZvP 1/1
PvT 2/1
This can be deceiving as itself, looking at it P would be OP, and T would be doing farewell, but in fact for anyone it should be 1/5 ,,,,
Also the small number of protoss justify why they are doing kind good ....
Edit: as only the good ones qualified ....
|
Not a surprise at all. Terrans just found out how to beat a greedy Zerg. Anyone who didn't see this coming is ignorant and better get used to players finding out cool timings to abuse this kind of stuff.
|
On November 24 2010 08:32 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 07:59 Sideburn wrote:On November 24 2010 07:16 Thetan wrote:On November 24 2010 07:06 StarcraftMan wrote:On November 24 2010 06:00 klauz619 wrote:On November 24 2010 05:51 FlamingTurd wrote:
Personally I think this new T rush is ridiculously strong and I really hope this gets patched out of existence. Yeah everytime zerg loses a new patch should be addressed so that the zerg who haven't improved at all since beta retains their 65% win rate. Seems to be the trend now. Try 100% win rate for GOM tournaments. Zerg have won GSL 1, GSL 2, and the GOM All Star invitational. Also, Zerg make up 27 of 64 players at GSL 3. If that isn't OP, I don't know what is. 3 tournaments is an incredibly small sample size. The number of players at a single GSL event is an incredibly small sample size. No real conclusions can be drawn from these statistics. yeah, you haven't taken a statistics course, have you? With the number of players we've had in all 3 GSLs, there are more than enough players to draw conclusions from the statistics. It's important to realize that we're not analyzing data here, we're actually looking at trends. The real data happens in the ladder, and then these players get the impression that terran cannot win in a long game, and zerg has incredible difficulty winning a rush game. Hence these trends manifest themselves in the GSL games. We don't need to look at every TvZ these guys play on the ladder, we can look at what builds they go for when their tournament life depends on it, and that's good enough as an indicator than anything else. The problem is not this early game terran cheese. The actual problem is that terrans do not believe they can win in the late-game against zerg, and so their only recourse is to do these 10-15 minute timing attacks. If terran felt comfortable in the late-game, then they would be less inclined to risk everything on cheese every series. So the problem is not that this cheese occurs, cheese should be allowed to occur, and is a powerful disincentive against certain types of play. Cheese is powerful but also needs to be fragile. As NewDawn demonstrated, it can be held off comfortably. If terrans figured out or were given more late-game viability, then they would not play such risky games.
Or maybe we're just seeing that Terrans are very comfortable with this 2-rax build and do it not because they do not believe in their late-game, but because the build is so powerful against zerg.
Again, as long the terran as really good game sense (I'm not claiming the build is easy), there doesn't seem to much risk in the build.
|
On November 24 2010 08:24 Thetan wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 08:19 Vaporized wrote:On November 24 2010 08:07 Thetan wrote:On November 24 2010 08:04 Vaporized wrote:
blind baneling nest with first 50 gas after speed, and a spine or two in key spots. every game until this nonsense stops. i havent lost to marines in a few days. 1750 diamond. if for some reason they dont push with marines -> 2 base banelings, scout for banshee. works very well for me.
this puts the terran in somewhat of a bind. if they went more then 2 barracks (terrans never have an expo if they are rushing marines) they are almost commited to bio, in which case i will roflstomp. a transition to blue flame hellions can be bad tho. i would rather see tanks come out of that factory. just make lings not banelings in that case. The problem with THIS build is that the terran DOES expo while pumping marines out of 2 rax now that i think about it one guy on metal made his barracks at his expo and expo'd fairly quickly. i defended like i described, and eventually with 2 base banelings i had enough bling to kill 2 bunkers, some marine maruader, and so many left over they instantly evaporated the expo command center. wish i saved that replay, just played it a few hours ago. maybe the terrans i play suck (possible, sure), but marine rushes are very predictable and in my experience, punishable. you dont need many drones to constantly make zerglings, and 2 gasses (sometimes i get 3) mining is enough over a few minutes to instantly morph 30-40 banelings when u are ready to push. I have a feeling you aren't playing anywhere near a high level if you have 750-1000 gas and min floating to devote to banelings
lol ok. zergs float resources all the time (the nature of being gas limited). we have the ability to make units simultaneously. i wait until i see what i need and then make a shitload of that. if banelings werent the answer then thats 10 mutas in one production cycle, or a shit load of roaches. not to mention im making lings the whole time (that cost no gas) which give me map control. against barracks only or barracks heavy builds enough lings to surround will save me if i need to defend a drop or something.
a large pack of lings (30-40+ like i said) will keep a terran in his base. if hes not moving out soon then i feel perfectly fine stockpiling gas because the units i need will be ready by the time he gets to my base. thats why i like to get a spire in mid game in case i need to hunt down dropships/banshees.
|
On November 24 2010 08:01 Thetan wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 07:59 Sideburn wrote:On November 24 2010 07:16 Thetan wrote:On November 24 2010 07:06 StarcraftMan wrote:On November 24 2010 06:00 klauz619 wrote:On November 24 2010 05:51 FlamingTurd wrote:
Personally I think this new T rush is ridiculously strong and I really hope this gets patched out of existence. Yeah everytime zerg loses a new patch should be addressed so that the zerg who haven't improved at all since beta retains their 65% win rate. Seems to be the trend now. Try 100% win rate for GOM tournaments. Zerg have won GSL 1, GSL 2, and the GOM All Star invitational. Also, Zerg make up 27 of 64 players at GSL 3. If that isn't OP, I don't know what is. 3 tournaments is an incredibly small sample size. The number of players at a single GSL event is an incredibly small sample size. No real conclusions can be drawn from these statistics. yeah, you haven't taken a statistics course, have you? With the number of players we've had in all 3 GSLs, there are more than enough players to draw conclusions from the statistics. Not if, as the post i was responding to was, you are only looking at the WINNERS of the GSL (which has a sample size of 3) and at the race distribution of only GSL 3. I haven't seen data on W-L% by race in the GSL overall (though that data would be interesting).
As opposed to Protoss in the GSL? The game is balanced pretty badly right now and I wouldn't be surprised if Blizzard buff Terran and Protoss, or simply nerf Zerg in the next patch to reach a better balance.
|
On November 24 2010 08:33 Raid wrote:
If you call this cheese your very wrong because its more of an all-in because if you fail your so behind 2 bases vs 1 and the loss in scvs..
this too in regards to stockpiling resources. i feel i am at a huge advantage after fending off the all in and can afford to stockpile gas for a few minutes to see what he is doing. i have a huge economic advantage. whatever units he is getting... well i can make an overwhelming number of the counter. just the nature of how the game got to that point. if i was up on larva injects during the early phase i can make 1 or 2 rounds of drones to boost my economy after the rush. at that point its just a matter of seeing what the terran is doing and stomping it. this is even more pronounced with no gas marine rushes. u will be so far behind on gas that the few banshees or thors u have will do nothing.
ive beaten off a marine rush, macro'd, scouted, and seen thors. he pushes out with 3 of them + marines + scvs and the ensuing baneling battle is hilariously one sided. like his whole ball of units just evaporates instantly.
|
oh no, no more free expansion? However you poor zergs must cope I cannot imagine.
|
On November 24 2010 04:39 Everlong wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 04:34 AnAngryDingo wrote:On November 24 2010 02:47 avilo wrote:On November 24 2010 01:18 rampaeg wrote:
Maybe blizzard should just make a better map pool with more maps like Shakuras...that would solve a lot of issues. YEAH GUY! Would you also suggest we use scrap station multiple times in ZvT series? That'd be just splendid. you obviously feel scrap station overwhelmingly favors zerg. what features of this map cause you to come to that conclusion? What about insane distance to counter 14hatch? Not to mention how easy it is for Zerg to defend both main and expo at the same time.. Then you've got this close air distance, so if you try to attack Zerg - ops, few (15) mutas are immidiately killing your base.. So to put it together, Zerg is here free to expo at will and you have to stay at your base for the whole game basicly.
What about insane distance to counter 14cc? Not to mention how easy it is for Terran to defend both main and expo at same time.. Then you've got this close Drop/Banshee distance, so if you try to attack Terran - oops, a few marauders (4) and banshees (1) are immediately killing your base.. So to put it together, Terran here is here free to expo at will and you have to stay at your base for the whole game basically.
Maps work both ways everyone.
|
I'm more of a spectator than a player; something needs to happen because this makes for the MOST boring games.
I'm not even going to comment on balance since I'm only in scrub division.
|
Well.. I have seen a lot of marine play on the ladder as well after GSL2 but nothing unscoutable and unstoppable so far. Really hard to cope with sure, but as I enjoy baneling play more than roach play in general, I don't mind hitting that fast nest after ling speed blindly. I haven't played anything too high leveled though, and if my opponents would control their marines better than they have, I would indeed be in trouble expanding at all, seeing how they can slowly build economy while keeping constant pressure and that means more marines coming my way and my larva all used on lings to stay alive.
Marines are a very strong all-around unit though while being extremely cheap and possible to build from the start so this type of play is to be expected i guess - even if it turns out to be stoppable there is no reason not to do it (if you still do as much damage to your enemy's economy when he needs to make units instead of drones and can't expand etc, you can still transition out and get a macro game, due to mules helping you out while pushing).
I guess we'll see how things develop shortly when the TvZ 'metagame' starts to stabilize a bit. Would indeed love to get my hands on a replay of this to study it a bit more closely than from VODs.
As I play for fun mostly and initially chose zerg as my race because people were saying it was the 'macro race' and thus leading to longer games, I kind of hope this all-in trend stops (or at least doesn't get any worse) so I could enjoy this matchup more. Not to say short games are not fun, but they are fun only in small doses now and then, constant 7-minute matches would eventually probably lead to less laddering in my part, even if I could win over half of them.
|
Like others have said, I understand that Z needs a second hatch as a unit producing structure, but why does it have to be at the natural? It's 350 minerals, the cost of less than 3 rax or 3 gateways. You can one base 2 hatch until you're no longer fragile.
Early expanding should be risky. This type of play is rampant exactly because the other alternatives are some sort of sneaky attacks aimed at your workers. Considering how quickly Zerg can potentially rebuild workers compared to the other two races, the reason this works is because it larva starves. You have to either make units or either make workers.
Well, that larva limitation is self-imposed, by mostly refusing to make non-mining hatches.
Look at how Foxer plays, he makes an ungodly amount of barracks even though his marine force throughout most of the game is around 20-30 food. In "conventional" play two or three barracks could produce that. He invests in production capacity. This allows him to macro up marines really fast off two bases. He's locked to rax units though.
Zerg is unique in that no hatchery is ever obsolete. They all produce larva, which are used for everything from drones to ultralisks. Your investment is never wasted if you need or want to tech switch.
|
Everything else aside, it makes for shit fucking gsl watching 
|
well there isn't really a risk of doing this because of mules
On the other hand, back then if reapers fail to do some damage terran will be behind econ wise
Even if you fail to a 2 rax build, terran force zerg to produce zerglings while terran can still have a better econ because of mules (if so the terran send some scv) and ofc bunkers to defend any counters
But yeh let time deal with this
Terran is a race that is so good early game, i think protoss players may agree to this as well
|
Let's hope this gsl is not won by another diferent zerg player like gsl1-2 and all stars or someone is gonna have a hard time justyfing the balance, besides "all terran players are allin noobs and FD nestea and kyrix are the best players in the world".
|
On November 24 2010 08:59 Awatsu wrote:
Let's hope this gsl is not won by another diferent zerg player like gsl1-2 and all stars or someone is gonna have a hard time justyfing the balance, besides "all terran players are allin noobs and FD nestea and kyrix are the best players in the world".
That's the point, people base balance on "GSL"
MLG Dallas = TERRAN VS PROTOSS (Jinro vs Socke)
BLIZZCON = TERRAN VS PROTOSS (NEX GENIUS vs Loner)
and these tourneys are pre patch
|
i still hatch first... only way to break me is to send all your scvs maybe. its still a huge risk going two rax.
|
On November 24 2010 09:03 DarkRise wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 08:59 Awatsu wrote:
Let's hope this gsl is not won by another diferent zerg player like gsl1-2 and all stars or someone is gonna have a hard time justyfing the balance, besides "all terran players are allin noobs and FD nestea and kyrix are the best players in the world". That's the point, people base balance on "GSL" MLG Dallas = TERRAN VS PROTOSS (Jinro vs Socke) BLIZZCON = TERRAN VS PROTOSS (NEX GENIUS vs Loner) and these tourneys are pre patch
Look at the quality of players in that tourney vs GSL.
|
The fact that they are even doing similar things to toss reminds me of what blizz said about the TvP matchup. How it didn't seem that it was the stimmed marauders that were a problem...it was the rines.
Rines are basically the ultimate unit until splash comes out.
|
I really, REALLY am amused by all the reformed terrans trying to explain to long time zerg players to "l2p".
Anyone can safely bet that 99.9% of 'new' zerg players giving "advice" in this thread can't do jack squat aside from mass zergling into mass roach into mass muta. For the amount of zerg I see on the ladder currently, it's really funny that every ZvT & ZvZ has fell into such a brain dead, noob-friendly "get 2 bases 40 roaches 1a and if it doesn't work keep doing it !!!".
Roach HP has to be nerfed and some its health transfered to hydralisks, that way you won't see 99 games out of 100 degenerate into 1 unit spam.
|
On November 24 2010 09:30 Shinkugami wrote:
I really, REALLY am amused by all the reformed terrans trying to explain to long time zerg players to "l2p".
Anyone can safely bet that 99.9% of 'new' zerg players giving "advice" in this thread can't do jack squat aside from mass zergling into mass roach into mass muta. For the amount of zerg I see on the ladder currently, it's really funny that every ZvT & ZvZ has fell into such a brain dead, noob-friendly "get 2 bases 40 roaches 1a and if it doesn't work keep doing it !!!".
Roach HP has to be nerfed and some its health transfered to hydralisks, that way you won't see 99 games out of 100 degenerate into 1 unit spam.
now now, no elitism. The last thing Zerg needs is a three groups of which two are elitist. (old school sc1 +2 zergs, always sc2 Zergs, and new sc2 zergs). what i said early in this thread is true. there are alot of LITTLE tricks you can add in to any build seemlessly to defend these attacks ALOT easier. and hell my standard opening rocks this build unless i mess up or the terran is worlds ahead of me micro wise.
|
On November 24 2010 08:59 Awatsu wrote:
Let's hope this gsl is not won by another diferent zerg player like gsl1-2 and all stars or someone is gonna have a hard time justyfing the balance, besides "all terran players are allin noobs and FD nestea and kyrix are the best players in the world".
The fact that GSL 1 & 2 and All Stars was won by 3 Zergs is proof of balance issues. If you examine the finals in depth, there was nothing Terran could do past mid-game. Foxer realized this and went agressive early because late game is always a Zerg win.
|
On November 24 2010 09:08 VenerableSpace wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 09:03 DarkRise wrote:On November 24 2010 08:59 Awatsu wrote:
Let's hope this gsl is not won by another diferent zerg player like gsl1-2 and all stars or someone is gonna have a hard time justyfing the balance, besides "all terran players are allin noobs and FD nestea and kyrix are the best players in the world". That's the point, people base balance on "GSL" MLG Dallas = TERRAN VS PROTOSS (Jinro vs Socke) BLIZZCON = TERRAN VS PROTOSS (NEX GENIUS vs Loner) and these tourneys are pre patch Look at the quality of players in that tourney vs GSL.
The only quality they lack is how to perform good all-ins if GSL3 has any say in that matter.
|
On November 24 2010 09:46 PrinceXizor wrote:
now now, no elitism. The last thing Zerg needs is a three groups of which two are elitist. (old school sc1 +2 zergs, always sc2 Zergs, and new sc2 zergs). what i said early in this thread is true. there are alot of LITTLE tricks you can add in to any build seemlessly to defend these attacks ALOT easier. and hell my standard opening rocks this build unless i mess up or the terran is worlds ahead of me micro wise.
It really doesn't affect ZvT that much but (as a zerg player even !) roaches have to get the nerfbat and the hydra has to be boosted in some way (armor or hp).
Terran basically have 2 units (marine tank) that counter the vast majority of the zerg arsenal aside from broodlords and ultras; In some cases if you do it efficiently enough, a terran can out-produce a roach army and sack it with marines alone (of course i'm talking early to mid game not a 50 v 50 scenario, which isn't very likely anyway).
Mutas and hydras are expensive as hell and not nearly as efficient as their cost implies unless you get an astronomical number of them. There is simply no way, as zerg, to efficiently sack the plan of a turtling terran if he's not completely asleep.
Most of this crap would be fixed if maps just were BIGGER. Blizzard consciously made Zerg as a shock and awe harass race but in the meantime made 90% of the maps the size of a shoebox, giving zero real mobility or harass options while giving free reign for noob-friendly "get 5 of them and win instantly" super units.
"Pro" (damn i hate that term) play isn't quite plagued with that because it mostly revolves around early to mid massive aggression but the vast majority of the rest (even in top diamond league) does pretty much nothing micro wise, just camps and camps and camps and camps even longer until they get their "zero micro 2 clicks win ball".
|
On November 24 2010 10:06 Shinkugami wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 09:46 PrinceXizor wrote:
now now, no elitism. The last thing Zerg needs is a three groups of which two are elitist. (old school sc1 +2 zergs, always sc2 Zergs, and new sc2 zergs). what i said early in this thread is true. there are alot of LITTLE tricks you can add in to any build seemlessly to defend these attacks ALOT easier. and hell my standard opening rocks this build unless i mess up or the terran is worlds ahead of me micro wise. It really doesn't affect ZvT that much but (as a zerg player even !) roaches have to get the nerfbat and the hydra has to be boosted in some way (armor or hp). Terran basically have 2 units (marine tank) that counter the vast majority of the zerg arsenal aside from broodlords and ultras; In some cases if you do it efficiently enough, a terran can out-produce a roach army and sack it with marines alone (of course i'm talking early to mid game not a 50 v 50 scenario, which isn't very likely anyway). Mutas and hydras are expensive as hell and not nearly as efficient as their cost implies unless you get an astronomical number of them. There is simply no way, as zerg, to efficiently sack the plan of a turtling terran if he's not completely asleep. Most of this crap would be fixed if maps just were BIGGER. Blizzard consciously made Zerg as a shock and awe harass race but in the meantime made 90% of the maps the size of a shoebox, giving zero real mobility or harass options while giving free reign for noob-friendly "get 5 of them and win instantly" super units. "Pro" (damn i hate that term) play isn't quite plagued with that because it mostly revolves around early to mid massive aggression but the vast majority of the rest (even in top diamond league) does pretty much nothing micro wise, just camps and camps and camps and camps even longer until they get their "zero micro 2 clicks win ball".
But the games i see don't just end in mass units like you seem to say. against T i use infestor ling throughout, hydra roach as a small bump in the mid game vs certain stratgies, i get mutas in about 1/3 of games, ultras in every game, brood lords in a 1/3 of games. i have so much diversity in the units i use vs terran and protoss. vs Zerg i use ling, baneling, roach, infestor, hydra, ultra. nothing else. alot less versitility vs Zergs but using 6/9 attacking units is still good. Most of the time the opposing player goes either marine -> marine marauder medivac -> + tanks and thors and vikings or zealot -> stalker sentry -> stalker collosus -> + immortal. vs me. but i chalk that up to the lack fo strategies that exist for non-pro level protosses. since upper level protoss can use air, templar, archons ect very well that you can't see with less than ideal control.
|
On November 24 2010 02:50 Deathfairy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 02:42 fdsdfg wrote:On November 24 2010 02:39 Fa1nT wrote:On November 24 2010 02:32 AlphaFerg wrote:
I've been trying to think of a possible reaction to the SCV/Marine All-in for a while, and I at least have the start of one.
The strength of the build is having the MULE, for sure, but also is in that the Terran user is able to constantly build marines out of the barracks that have already been built with the economy remaining (MULEs and a few SCVs). In addition, the prospect of having the larger natural to protect is difficult.
So, let's imagine the following scenario (which is Liquid'Haypro v. BitbybitPrime.we), where there are about 12 SCVs and 10 Marines (with more being rallied), and Terran has enough economy to support 4 rax. Haypro at this point had about 30 drones, 2 hatch, 2 queen, 1 spine crawler and ~10ish zerglings on the way. As we saw in the matchup last night, Bitbybit cleaned house.
Here is what I think a possible reaction could be. After the 14 hatch, get the spawning pool as quickly as possible. By this time, you should have scouted and should know if there is an all-in coming. Instead of getting more drones and an extra queen, throw down 2-3 spine crawlers in your main. Mass produce zerglings with your larvae, not drones.
Now here is the key moment, especially on maps with a small choke into the natural. You need to be sure to scout when Terran is moving out, and at that moment move your zerglings out to pass by them without attacking (along an alternate path). Kill their remaining SCVs, MULEs, and stop reinforcements from the 4 rax. They, of course, will destroy your natural, but simply pull all your drones back to your main. Now, when he moves into your main, not only is his base being demolished, but you have 2-3 spine crawlers, ~25 drones, and as many zerglings as you could scare up since you sent your main force out. All you have to do is make sure your hatch doesnt fall, and you will be in good shape.
So I know this idea is a bit unrefined, but I believe that it could work as an appropriate response, as it both has a way of denying MULE usage and also you get the benefit of not having to defend two bases. Please give feedback, from both sides of the fence. The whole point is that the terran will SCAN before moving out, if you got 3 spines and a ton of zerglings, they simply sit in their base and macro up. As a zerg, you cannot scout if they are doing an all in or not, simply by having 2 barracks in the wall. Exactly this. A lot of terrans on ladder just blindly commit to the all-in, but the smart way to do this is to scan. You lose one mule and had to cut 1-2 SCVs, but if the Zerg prepared, then he cut 10+ drones. That's enough to enter the midgame with a very large advantage. Huge exaggeration. It takes 2 spines and 4 roaches to be fairly safe at the moment of moving out for t, since you can realistically make another 5roaches/10 lings. That is hardly cutting 10 drones. As it stands right now zerg HAS to get something to fight helions/4-5 marine pushes as it is. usualy 3-4 roaches or spine + lings. Well if you see 2 rax make 2 spines, at very least you are still dead even 150 for rax vs 150 for spine.
That's 600 min and 100 gas and 6 larvae. I think it's safe to call that 10 drones.
Also, do NOT compare spines vs barracks. He cannot skip a barracks, and you can easily skip spines. Your spines become useless pretty quickly, and his barracks do not, in fact they will inevitably be built anyway.
|
The game is quite bad at the moment ,i'm no balance expert but i'm pretty sure thats not how they intended ZvT to be...
Lets hope it gets better.
|
Pre patch weren't Zergs making anywhere from 3-5 spines in their nat for protection? It wasn't a bad thing then and it isn't now. Even if the Terran scans and stays home the spines aren't wasted because as you push the map with creep you can move you'r spines in to an offensive position. What ever happened to putting a little money in defense and not just expecting the other player to ignore you?
|
United States7166 Posts
![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images2/thumb/9/9f/Spine_Crawler.png/181px-Spine_Crawler.png)
Yes, the scv/marine allin is best handled with spines.. they are so extremely cost effective at stopping it. As others have said banes/roach leave you too behind economically, spines are actually extremely cost effective especially vs marines and scvs because spines have 2 armor and 2 shot marines. The key is you have to bind your spines and manually target marines otherwise theyll hit scvs and that'll be useless, of course you pull drones as well if they brought scvs or if they try to somehow run past your spines. as for spine timing im not conservative, i start the first before my first queen is out in a 14pool 15 hatch build, and before its done i start at least 2 more.
but of course the difficulty is on maps like delta, xel naga, even metalopolis somewhat. well on those maps you gotta get more spines than normal, even like 5. and you gotta use first energy on creep tumors. It sounds stupid and impractical to make that many spines early but it's actually the best way still, you can still pump so many drones and i avoid gas totally for a long time while doing this (cus their gas was also delayed and really the spines can save you vs most everything anyway, banshees would take too long and you can easily get D in time).. and with dual queens pumping larva and all drones on minerals only you can saturate really really fast.
you might think all they gotta do is scan and they wont send scvs but still you can get insane amount of drones quickly, you can fully saturate considerably faster than if you had gone a normal speedling/lair build anyway
|
...And by the time you have both bases saturated, zero or very few units and your wonderful spine wall, he has 4 tanks shelling out at your base and 20 marines waiting besides them. GG.
|
On November 24 2010 10:44 Shinkugami wrote:
...And by the time you have both bases saturated, zero or very few units and your wonderful spine wall, he has 4 tanks shelling out at your base and 20 marines waiting besides them. GG.
Yeah zerg having 0 units at the 9 minute mark is believable.
|
so annoying.
this build is a strong early aggression build. the reason everyone does it is because they arent confident with late game play against zerg and prefer early game play.
lets look at the history of sc2 so far since release.
first there was the popular 5 rax reaper. killing zerg before 10 minutes. why did terrans use this. because it was OP and they didnt feel confident with late game play.
then there was alot of reactor hellion into banshee stuff. why because reaper died out with nerfs. again 1 base early mid game plays. why because terrans arent confident with late game play.
around the same time as reactor hellion was the MASS THOR phase. where all terrans did was get an expo then mass thors and attack. why? because mass thors was insane because at the time it hit just before late game of zerg as ultralisk cavern was building. essentially ending the game before playing against late game zerg. why because terran wasnt confident playing late game zerg.
and now this. 2 rax marine scv all in stuff. why because it shits on zerg against like 5 rax reaper. not as OP but a bitch to hold. why terrans do it. because its effective and they arent confident with late game zerg.
do you see a pattern here? terran players have been using 1 base stuff since release. all with the excuse of hard late game. BUT THEY ARENT EXPLORING LATE GAME PLAYSTYLES!! you cant say late game is impossible if your opening every game with 5 rax reaper/ reactor hellion into banshee/ mass thors for that one time death push/ 2 rax marine stuff
terrans since release have almost all been using these 1 base win or lose builds. i dont think ive seen any pro terran player use a build that even ATTEMPTS to bring the game into late game. yet they are all more then happy to whine about late game.
the reason zerg seems op in late game is because THEY HAVE BEEN PLAYING FOR THE LATE GAME SINCE THE BEGINING!
months of constant playing just to play in the late game have ment zerg knows how to play 20+ minute games with ease.
terran players have been doing 1 base all ins then riding on the advantage they gained from the damage they have done for months now. so its natural for when zerg learn to start surviving these 1 base all ins. and bringing more and more games into the late game for zergs to win more games.
and its time for terran players to adapt.
and they have. just with more 1 base early aggression stuff. and eventually zerg will learn some sort of timing to stop this too. and games will go into the late game. and terrans will still whine.
/rantover.
|
On November 24 2010 11:14 TyrantPotato wrote:
so annoying.
this build is a strong early aggression build. the reason everyone does it is because they arent confident with late game play against zerg and prefer early game play.
lets look at the history of sc2 so far since release.
first there was the popular 5 rax reaper. killing zerg before 10 minutes. why did terrans use this. because it was OP and they didnt feel confident with late game play.
then there was alot of reactor hellion into banshee stuff. why because reaper died out with nerfs. again 1 base early mid game plays. why because terrans arent confident with late game play.
around the same time as reactor hellion was the MASS THOR phase. where all terrans did was get an expo then mass thors and attack. why? because mass thors was insane because at the time it hit just before late game of zerg as ultralisk cavern was building. essentially ending the game before playing against late game zerg. why because terran wasnt confident playing late game zerg.
and now this. 2 rax marine scv all in stuff. why because it shits on zerg against like 5 rax reaper. not as OP but a bitch to hold. why terrans do it. because its effective and they arent confident with late game zerg.
do you see a pattern here? terran players have been using 1 base stuff since release. all with the excuse of hard late game. BUT THEY ARENT EXPLORING LATE GAME PLAYSTYLES!! you cant say late game is impossible if your opening every game with 5 rax reaper/ reactor hellion into banshee/ mass thors for that one time death push/ 2 rax marine stuff
terrans since release have almost all been using these 1 base win or lose builds. i dont think ive seen any pro terran player use a build that even ATTEMPTS to bring the game into late game. yet they are all more then happy to whine about late game.
the reason zerg seems op in late game is because THEY HAVE BEEN PLAYING FOR THE LATE GAME SINCE THE BEGINING!
months of constant playing just to play in the late game have ment zerg knows how to play 20+ minute games with ease.
terran players have been doing 1 base all ins then riding on the advantage they gained from the damage they have done for months now. so its natural for when zerg learn to start surviving these 1 base all ins. and bringing more and more games into the late game for zergs to win more games.
and its time for terran players to adapt.
and they have. just with more 1 base early aggression stuff. and eventually zerg will learn some sort of timing to stop this too. and games will go into the late game. and terrans will still whine.
/rantover.
I am pretty sure those players practice playing late game and realize that early aggression gave them a better chance in TvZ so that is what they do in tournaments. Stop capitalizing random phrases in your post. It makes you look like an idiot especially when those phrases are stupid. So you think these guys who play for a living for some reason don't practice late game? How do you know they don't explore late game?? Did you get to see their practice games by some chances?
|
On November 24 2010 11:20 positron. wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 11:14 TyrantPotato wrote:
so annoying.
this build is a strong early aggression build. the reason everyone does it is because they arent confident with late game play against zerg and prefer early game play.
lets look at the history of sc2 so far since release.
first there was the popular 5 rax reaper. killing zerg before 10 minutes. why did terrans use this. because it was OP and they didnt feel confident with late game play.
then there was alot of reactor hellion into banshee stuff. why because reaper died out with nerfs. again 1 base early mid game plays. why because terrans arent confident with late game play.
around the same time as reactor hellion was the MASS THOR phase. where all terrans did was get an expo then mass thors and attack. why? because mass thors was insane because at the time it hit just before late game of zerg as ultralisk cavern was building. essentially ending the game before playing against late game zerg. why because terran wasnt confident playing late game zerg.
and now this. 2 rax marine scv all in stuff. why because it shits on zerg against like 5 rax reaper. not as OP but a bitch to hold. why terrans do it. because its effective and they arent confident with late game zerg.
do you see a pattern here? terran players have been using 1 base stuff since release. all with the excuse of hard late game. BUT THEY ARENT EXPLORING LATE GAME PLAYSTYLES!! you cant say late game is impossible if your opening every game with 5 rax reaper/ reactor hellion into banshee/ mass thors for that one time death push/ 2 rax marine stuff
terrans since release have almost all been using these 1 base win or lose builds. i dont think ive seen any pro terran player use a build that even ATTEMPTS to bring the game into late game. yet they are all more then happy to whine about late game.
the reason zerg seems op in late game is because THEY HAVE BEEN PLAYING FOR THE LATE GAME SINCE THE BEGINING!
months of constant playing just to play in the late game have ment zerg knows how to play 20+ minute games with ease.
terran players have been doing 1 base all ins then riding on the advantage they gained from the damage they have done for months now. so its natural for when zerg learn to start surviving these 1 base all ins. and bringing more and more games into the late game for zergs to win more games.
and its time for terran players to adapt.
and they have. just with more 1 base early aggression stuff. and eventually zerg will learn some sort of timing to stop this too. and games will go into the late game. and terrans will still whine.
/rantover. So you think these guys who play for a living for some reason don't practice late game? How do you know they don't explore late game?? Did you get to see their practice games by some chances?
They are not exploring it enough then. To say that they have is to say that SC2 is figured out already, and if 1-base timing attack play is the standard TvZ for SC2, it will never become as prevalent as SC1 without a major overhaul.
|
On November 24 2010 11:14 TyrantPotato wrote:
so annoying.
this build is a strong early aggression build. the reason everyone does it is because they arent confident with late game play against zerg and prefer early game play.
lets look at the history of sc2 so far since release.
first there was the popular 5 rax reaper. killing zerg before 10 minutes. why did terrans use this. because it was OP and they didnt feel confident with late game play.
then there was alot of reactor hellion into banshee stuff. why because reaper died out with nerfs. again 1 base early mid game plays. why because terrans arent confident with late game play.
around the same time as reactor hellion was the MASS THOR phase. where all terrans did was get an expo then mass thors and attack. why? because mass thors was insane because at the time it hit just before late game of zerg as ultralisk cavern was building. essentially ending the game before playing against late game zerg. why because terran wasnt confident playing late game zerg.
and now this. 2 rax marine scv all in stuff. why because it shits on zerg against like 5 rax reaper. not as OP but a bitch to hold. why terrans do it. because its effective and they arent confident with late game zerg.
do you see a pattern here? terran players have been using 1 base stuff since release. all with the excuse of hard late game. BUT THEY ARENT EXPLORING LATE GAME PLAYSTYLES!! you cant say late game is impossible if your opening every game with 5 rax reaper/ reactor hellion into banshee/ mass thors for that one time death push/ 2 rax marine stuff
terrans since release have almost all been using these 1 base win or lose builds. i dont think ive seen any pro terran player use a build that even ATTEMPTS to bring the game into late game. yet they are all more then happy to whine about late game.
the reason zerg seems op in late game is because THEY HAVE BEEN PLAYING FOR THE LATE GAME SINCE THE BEGINING!
months of constant playing just to play in the late game have ment zerg knows how to play 20+ minute games with ease.
terran players have been doing 1 base all ins then riding on the advantage they gained from the damage they have done for months now. so its natural for when zerg learn to start surviving these 1 base all ins. and bringing more and more games into the late game for zergs to win more games.
and its time for terran players to adapt.
and they have. just with more 1 base early aggression stuff. and eventually zerg will learn some sort of timing to stop this too. and games will go into the late game. and terrans will still whine.
/rantover.
Dude, you keep saying "they" and I don't know what you're talking about because I have seen almost every professional Terran play a great late game. Not only that but it's my favorite play style, you have it all wrong, which is expected because you play Zerg and probably only Zerg. Terrans aren't confident not because of "exploration", (which is the dumbest thing I have heard) it's because macro wise Zerg's shit on Terrans and unless you do heavy hurass or early game damage you will lose against an equal player.
I said it once and I'll say it again, make spine crawlers and get over it.
|
On November 24 2010 11:33 Fa1nT wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 11:20 positron. wrote:On November 24 2010 11:14 TyrantPotato wrote:
so annoying.
this build is a strong early aggression build. the reason everyone does it is because they arent confident with late game play against zerg and prefer early game play.
lets look at the history of sc2 so far since release.
first there was the popular 5 rax reaper. killing zerg before 10 minutes. why did terrans use this. because it was OP and they didnt feel confident with late game play.
then there was alot of reactor hellion into banshee stuff. why because reaper died out with nerfs. again 1 base early mid game plays. why because terrans arent confident with late game play.
around the same time as reactor hellion was the MASS THOR phase. where all terrans did was get an expo then mass thors and attack. why? because mass thors was insane because at the time it hit just before late game of zerg as ultralisk cavern was building. essentially ending the game before playing against late game zerg. why because terran wasnt confident playing late game zerg.
and now this. 2 rax marine scv all in stuff. why because it shits on zerg against like 5 rax reaper. not as OP but a bitch to hold. why terrans do it. because its effective and they arent confident with late game zerg.
do you see a pattern here? terran players have been using 1 base stuff since release. all with the excuse of hard late game. BUT THEY ARENT EXPLORING LATE GAME PLAYSTYLES!! you cant say late game is impossible if your opening every game with 5 rax reaper/ reactor hellion into banshee/ mass thors for that one time death push/ 2 rax marine stuff
terrans since release have almost all been using these 1 base win or lose builds. i dont think ive seen any pro terran player use a build that even ATTEMPTS to bring the game into late game. yet they are all more then happy to whine about late game.
the reason zerg seems op in late game is because THEY HAVE BEEN PLAYING FOR THE LATE GAME SINCE THE BEGINING!
months of constant playing just to play in the late game have ment zerg knows how to play 20+ minute games with ease.
terran players have been doing 1 base all ins then riding on the advantage they gained from the damage they have done for months now. so its natural for when zerg learn to start surviving these 1 base all ins. and bringing more and more games into the late game for zergs to win more games.
and its time for terran players to adapt.
and they have. just with more 1 base early aggression stuff. and eventually zerg will learn some sort of timing to stop this too. and games will go into the late game. and terrans will still whine.
/rantover. So you think these guys who play for a living for some reason don't practice late game? How do you know they don't explore late game?? Did you get to see their practice games by some chances? They are not exploring it enough then. To say that they have is to say that SC2 is figured out already, and if 1-base timing attack play is the standard TvZ for SC2, it will never become as prevalent as SC1 without a major overhaul.
They practice enough to decide that early aggression is their best bet at this stage so that is what they are using. I don't see anything wrong with that. It's funny how when Terran told Zerg to l2p they cried and whined until they got the patch and now it is their turn to say hohoho l2p. That guy came in here and capitalize phrases like "BUT THEY ARENT EXPLORING LATE GAME PLAYSTYLES!!" like a retard.
|
On November 24 2010 11:14 TyrantPotato wrote:
so annoying.
this build is a strong early aggression build. the reason everyone does it is because they arent confident with late game play against zerg and prefer early game play.
Yup, I agree. You can't beat Zerg in the late game with Terran so the pros are forced to gamble everything before Zerg reaches late game.
|
On November 24 2010 11:33 Fa1nT wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 11:20 positron. wrote:On November 24 2010 11:14 TyrantPotato wrote:
so annoying.
this build is a strong early aggression build. the reason everyone does it is because they arent confident with late game play against zerg and prefer early game play.
lets look at the history of sc2 so far since release.
first there was the popular 5 rax reaper. killing zerg before 10 minutes. why did terrans use this. because it was OP and they didnt feel confident with late game play.
then there was alot of reactor hellion into banshee stuff. why because reaper died out with nerfs. again 1 base early mid game plays. why because terrans arent confident with late game play.
around the same time as reactor hellion was the MASS THOR phase. where all terrans did was get an expo then mass thors and attack. why? because mass thors was insane because at the time it hit just before late game of zerg as ultralisk cavern was building. essentially ending the game before playing against late game zerg. why because terran wasnt confident playing late game zerg.
and now this. 2 rax marine scv all in stuff. why because it shits on zerg against like 5 rax reaper. not as OP but a bitch to hold. why terrans do it. because its effective and they arent confident with late game zerg.
do you see a pattern here? terran players have been using 1 base stuff since release. all with the excuse of hard late game. BUT THEY ARENT EXPLORING LATE GAME PLAYSTYLES!! you cant say late game is impossible if your opening every game with 5 rax reaper/ reactor hellion into banshee/ mass thors for that one time death push/ 2 rax marine stuff
terrans since release have almost all been using these 1 base win or lose builds. i dont think ive seen any pro terran player use a build that even ATTEMPTS to bring the game into late game. yet they are all more then happy to whine about late game.
the reason zerg seems op in late game is because THEY HAVE BEEN PLAYING FOR THE LATE GAME SINCE THE BEGINING!
months of constant playing just to play in the late game have ment zerg knows how to play 20+ minute games with ease.
terran players have been doing 1 base all ins then riding on the advantage they gained from the damage they have done for months now. so its natural for when zerg learn to start surviving these 1 base all ins. and bringing more and more games into the late game for zergs to win more games.
and its time for terran players to adapt.
and they have. just with more 1 base early aggression stuff. and eventually zerg will learn some sort of timing to stop this too. and games will go into the late game. and terrans will still whine.
/rantover. So you think these guys who play for a living for some reason don't practice late game? How do you know they don't explore late game?? Did you get to see their practice games by some chances? They are not exploring it enough then. To say that they have is to say that SC2 is figured out already, and if 1-base timing attack play is the standard TvZ for SC2, it will never become as prevalent as SC1 without a major overhaul.
They are paid, live in the same house with teammates just to play games, you don't think that no pro terrans in all clans tell their zerg teammates "hey, you and me, let's practice some games where I'll play heavy macro, maybe it's the key to Terran currently" and then they lost terribly? Do you think they just mass game up, and not sit down to analyze the replays with their teammates? If you say Terran didn't explore it enough, then it's the same as Zerg. Why is 2 rax scv rush so effective? Is it because that build is op, or Zerg are not exploring it enough?
Sometimes things really need to, like you say, an overhaul (patching), to make things balance quicker. we don't want to sit around 6 months trying to "explore" all the possibility, that would be so stupid. If T get buff and become OP again, we only need to nerf T again, that's how things work.
|
Russian Federation798 Posts
On November 24 2010 11:14 TyrantPotato wrote:
so annoying.
this build is a strong early aggression build. the reason everyone does it is because they arent confident with late game play against zerg and prefer early game play.
lets look at the history of sc2 so far since release.
first there was the popular 5 rax reaper. killing zerg before 10 minutes. why did terrans use this. because it was OP and they didnt feel confident with late game play.
then there was alot of reactor hellion into banshee stuff. why because reaper died out with nerfs. again 1 base early mid game plays. why because terrans arent confident with late game play.
around the same time as reactor hellion was the MASS THOR phase. where all terrans did was get an expo then mass thors and attack. why? because mass thors was insane because at the time it hit just before late game of zerg as ultralisk cavern was building. essentially ending the game before playing against late game zerg. why because terran wasnt confident playing late game zerg.
and now this. 2 rax marine scv all in stuff. why because it shits on zerg against like 5 rax reaper. not as OP but a bitch to hold. why terrans do it. because its effective and they arent confident with late game zerg.
do you see a pattern here? terran players have been using 1 base stuff since release. all with the excuse of hard late game. BUT THEY ARENT EXPLORING LATE GAME PLAYSTYLES!! you cant say late game is impossible if your opening every game with 5 rax reaper/ reactor hellion into banshee/ mass thors for that one time death push/ 2 rax marine stuff
terrans since release have almost all been using these 1 base win or lose builds. i dont think ive seen any pro terran player use a build that even ATTEMPTS to bring the game into late game. yet they are all more then happy to whine about late game.
the reason zerg seems op in late game is because THEY HAVE BEEN PLAYING FOR THE LATE GAME SINCE THE BEGINING!
months of constant playing just to play in the late game have ment zerg knows how to play 20+ minute games with ease.
terran players have been doing 1 base all ins then riding on the advantage they gained from the damage they have done for months now. so its natural for when zerg learn to start surviving these 1 base all ins. and bringing more and more games into the late game for zergs to win more games.
and its time for terran players to adapt.
and they have. just with more 1 base early aggression stuff. and eventually zerg will learn some sort of timing to stop this too. and games will go into the late game. and terrans will still whine.
/rantover.
Really? Zerg "learned" to survive or was everything patched for them?
Korean terran pros practise 10-12 hrs a day in a team. Do you think these people haven't explored the late game possibilities?
|
On November 24 2010 11:14 TyrantPotato wrote:
so annoying.
this build is a strong early aggression build. the reason everyone does it is because they arent confident with late game play against zerg and prefer early game play.
lets look at the history of sc2 so far since release.
first there was the popular 5 rax reaper. killing zerg before 10 minutes. why did terrans use this. because it was OP and they didnt feel confident with late game play.
then there was alot of reactor hellion into banshee stuff. why because reaper died out with nerfs. again 1 base early mid game plays. why because terrans arent confident with late game play.
around the same time as reactor hellion was the MASS THOR phase. where all terrans did was get an expo then mass thors and attack. why? because mass thors was insane because at the time it hit just before late game of zerg as ultralisk cavern was building. essentially ending the game before playing against late game zerg. why because terran wasnt confident playing late game zerg.
and now this. 2 rax marine scv all in stuff. why because it shits on zerg against like 5 rax reaper. not as OP but a bitch to hold. why terrans do it. because its effective and they arent confident with late game zerg.
do you see a pattern here? terran players have been using 1 base stuff since release. all with the excuse of hard late game. BUT THEY ARENT EXPLORING LATE GAME PLAYSTYLES!! you cant say late game is impossible if your opening every game with 5 rax reaper/ reactor hellion into banshee/ mass thors for that one time death push/ 2 rax marine stuff
terrans since release have almost all been using these 1 base win or lose builds. i dont think ive seen any pro terran player use a build that even ATTEMPTS to bring the game into late game. yet they are all more then happy to whine about late game.
the reason zerg seems op in late game is because THEY HAVE BEEN PLAYING FOR THE LATE GAME SINCE THE BEGINING!
months of constant playing just to play in the late game have ment zerg knows how to play 20+ minute games with ease.
terran players have been doing 1 base all ins then riding on the advantage they gained from the damage they have done for months now. so its natural for when zerg learn to start surviving these 1 base all ins. and bringing more and more games into the late game for zergs to win more games.
and its time for terran players to adapt.
and they have. just with more 1 base early aggression stuff. and eventually zerg will learn some sort of timing to stop this too. and games will go into the late game. and terrans will still whine.
/rantover.
good statement, terrans must suck cause obviously you are a great zerg player. thats all what I can read in your post.
I dont know what you are doing but I dont cheese, all in in customgames and I play like 50% cgs instead of ladder. even the zergs I train with say that the mu shifted into their favor and only ZvZ gives them a hard time.
|
Where da compulsory, absolutely required 14-15 hatch at? Think JulyZerg pretty much blew that misconception out of the way while absolutely blowing up macro wise.
|
On November 24 2010 23:05 dakalro wrote:
Where da compulsory, absolutely required 14-15 hatch at? Think JulyZerg pretty much blew that misconception out of the way while absolutely blowing up macro wise.
zvp is best played with early speedlings to counter stalker/zealot early aggression
|
On November 24 2010 23:05 dakalro wrote:
Where da compulsory, absolutely required 14-15 hatch at? Think JulyZerg pretty much blew that misconception out of the way while absolutely blowing up macro wise.
Let's quote more ZvP games when we're talking about ZvT.
Those +1 zealots sure to own zerglings, nerf marines to fix it IMO.
|
But if the hatch isn't needed by the race to survive or win and is actually skipped to counter early aggression then why do zerg players whine so much about one certain type of aggression that they could easily counter since they're already doing it in PvZ?
|
zergs should learn with July ...
14 hatch is not a must, u can 20 and still smash
|
On November 24 2010 23:42 noD wrote:
zergs should learn with July ...
14 hatch is not a must, u can 20 and still smash
Again with the ZvP.
2 words: bunker block.
20 hatch has been countered before it got off the ground.
|
On November 24 2010 16:44 fishinguy wrote:
Really? Zerg "learned" to survive or was everything patched for them?
Korean terran pros practise 10-12 hrs a day in a team. Do you think these people haven't explored the late game possibilities?
^^^
QFT. Zerg players didn't learn how to counter - they just asked Blizzard to patch it for them so they didnt have to learn.
|
I don't know whats worse.
The whining of the Z players...
Or the morons that bring up ZvP when this topic is about ZvT...
|
Marine SCV is pretty solid & bunkers blocking off ramps is the most annoying thing in hell, love how blizzard learnt how terran's like to wall off with buildings from SC1 and super sized it in SC2 to create these head ache situations for the zergs. Decrease collision width for bunkers and pylons so lings can atleast surround it and hopefully pick off the building scv and get out off the base to atleast stand a chance of cleaning up the early game abuse.
|
Marine pressure was a little underrated by myself. I think that it's actually pretty good now... kinda needed to even out the match up.
|
On November 24 2010 11:48 positron. wrote:
They practice enough to decide that early aggression is their best bet at this stage so that is what they are using. I don't see anything wrong with that. It's funny how when Terran told Zerg to l2p they cried and whined until they got the patch and now it is their turn to say hohoho l2p.
Not true. The "l2p" retards are all the terrans who switched; Don't confuse them with us.
|
Wanting a free expansion early in the game = economic cheese.
We all know Z is the macro race in SC2. In BW T was the macro race, and guess what, when they 14cc'ed they were punished by 9pool. 2rax = SC2's 9pool.
|
As said earlier in the thread, 3 spine crawlers target firing their marines while you pull drones and you can stop this actually quite easily, 4-6 zerglings, a queen, 2-3 crawlers, and 10 drones, if you crush it hard enough the terran is done. If you get a transfusion off, it's lights out.
Gotta target fire though, if the marines don't get touched you're boned.
I wanna see a replay where a zerg does this (especially target firing), and still loses.
|
It's a punishment to 14 hatch. Why do Zerg-only players think they need and deserve a 14 hatch?
|
On November 25 2010 03:28 oxxo wrote:
It's a punishment to 14 hatch. Why do Zerg-only players think they need and deserve a 14 hatch?
Because its been proven over and over that zerg can't keep up in economy without it.
|
On November 25 2010 04:26 Jermstuddog wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2010 03:28 oxxo wrote:
It's a punishment to 14 hatch. Why do Zerg-only players think they need and deserve a 14 hatch? Because its been proven over and over that zerg can't keep up in economy without it.
That doesn't make any sense. Zerg can make drones faster than terran or protoss. Yeah, Mules will favor the terran economy after saturation occurs for both races, but you don't see protoss expecting a free nexus at 14. To some extent zerg needs a 2nd hatch to keep up with unit production, though with larva inject it's not too uneven 1 base versus 1 base. And you can always make a 2nd hatch in your main. Terran and protoss has to make multiple production buildings in their main....
|
On November 25 2010 04:39 busdriver wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2010 04:26 Jermstuddog wrote:On November 25 2010 03:28 oxxo wrote:
It's a punishment to 14 hatch. Why do Zerg-only players think they need and deserve a 14 hatch? Because its been proven over and over that zerg can't keep up in economy without it. That doesn't make any sense. Zerg can make drones faster than terran or protoss. Yeah, Mules will favor the terran economy after saturation occurs for both races, but you don't see protoss expecting a free nexus at 14. To some extent zerg needs a 2nd hatch to keep up with unit production, though with larva inject it's not too uneven 1 base versus 1 base. And you can always make a 2nd hatch in your main. Terran and protoss has to make multiple production buildings in their main....
Link me a high-level replay where zerg is ahead in drone count before the 8 minute mark.
FE or otherwise doesn't matter, I have yet to see one.
|
On November 25 2010 04:26 Jermstuddog wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2010 03:28 oxxo wrote:
It's a punishment to 14 hatch. Why do Zerg-only players think they need and deserve a 14 hatch? Because its been proven over and over that zerg can't keep up in economy without it.
Thats why you have to secure you'r expo, it takes you forever to saturate it anyway, why not wait until a good timing and then expo like everyone else. It's not like you can't just drone up and make 30 drones for your expo in 1 minute... Thats why Zergs can catch up so fast, drone pumping.
|
So Zerg should be expected to make 30 drones in 1 minute off 1 base with no income when they start behind in drones?
Stop pretending Zerg is magic and realize that inherent worker handicaps aren't overcome by wishing them away. They're overcome by making those workers stretch farther by taking an expo.
Zergs don't take a 14 hatch to get ahead. They take a 14 hatch so they can stay even.
Again, give me this magical "econ cheesing" replay where a zerg player has the better econ in the first 8 minutes.
|
On November 23 2010 17:58 IdrA wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 17:56 Alay wrote:On November 23 2010 17:42 IdrA wrote:
its not even an anti-fast expand build, its nearly as good vs pool first
they can have 7-9 marines at your choke before speed finishes even if you 14 gas 14 pool, means you have to make constant lings off of pool first to just barely defend the rush, and the thing is if they scout you making pure lings they just put down a command center and are way ahead. even if you completely stop the rush you have a bunch of useless zerglings and they have more workers than you, and you have a late hatch.
its a build that can punish anything thats not purely defensive, but it sacrifices like 1 scv of economy. Do you think a fast baneling nest or a fast roach transition into reverse pressure with the roaches would be a viable response to this sort of pressure? the problem with that is its so easy to nullify hatch tech aggression, they put the barracks at the choke anyway so they have a thick wallin ready for banelings and 1-2 bunkers makes offensive roaches useless. the whole point is that this build requires an overwhelming response from z and its really easy for t to just make that response a waste of money.
I saw you doing the 7RR in quite a few replays around the time of MLG Dallas. What do you think the korean's response to this would be if they openned 2rax rine pressure. Have you tried it at all? If yes, how were the results?
|
It's indeed a very good strat against zerg. =)
autowin. If anyone feel he can beat me (playing terran 4 rax) while fast expanding, feel free to private message me to test it. =)
|
On November 24 2010 23:50 ghostnuke1234 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 16:44 fishinguy wrote:
Really? Zerg "learned" to survive or was everything patched for them?
Korean terran pros practise 10-12 hrs a day in a team. Do you think these people haven't explored the late game possibilities?
^^^ QFT. Zerg players didn't learn how to counter - they just asked Blizzard to patch it for them so they didnt have to learn.
Funny I laugh a bit
|
On November 24 2010 23:50 ghostnuke1234 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 16:44 fishinguy wrote:
Really? Zerg "learned" to survive or was everything patched for them?
Korean terran pros practise 10-12 hrs a day in a team. Do you think these people haven't explored the late game possibilities?
^^^ QFT. Zerg players didn't learn how to counter - they just asked Blizzard to patch it for them so they didnt have to learn.
Yeah, every zerg player wasn't even trying to play the game. All the Terran players are hard-working, noble individuals and Z are lazy slobs who want wins for free. No exceptions of course, because if there were a single exception he would dominate the scene by making use of the OP zerg.
Also, please note this didn't apply in early beta when Terran got like 6 rounds of buffs. That was to fix a balance issue, nothing to do with T whining.
|
I don't think everyone should overreact too quickly to this. It's easy to forget that SC2 strategy is still very, very, young. This strat seems very gimmicky to me and in general an overreaction by Terran players to the roach buff since late-game ZvT is skewed toward Zerg right now. This is going to lead to Zergs overreacting to Terran aggression and the match-up is going to wing back and forth like that until it stabilizes.
At the very least wait until the end of this GSL before drawing broad conclusions about the meta-game.
Instead, lets talk about the badass that is NewDawn!
NewDawn Fighting!
|
Honestly...on a short map, don't 14 hatch...
On long maps, you don't need to make blings blind, you'll 'usually' be able to scout the 2 rax and respond with a spine or two as you transition to blings.
Also, I only consider cheese something that's a true all-in, and yeah you can say "LOL T can't all-in they have mules imba!@", but that strategy if done decently will at least break even with the Zerg losses, I generally don't think it's an all-in.
|
On November 25 2010 11:25 LancerStarcraft wrote:
I don't think everyone should overreact too quickly to this. It's easy to forget that SC2 strategy is still very, very, young. This strat seems very gimmicky to me and in general an overreaction by Terran players to the roach buff since late-game ZvT is skewed toward Zerg right now. This is going to lead to Zergs overreacting to Terran aggression and the match-up is going to wing back and forth like that until it stabilizes.
At the very least wait until the end of this GSL before drawing broad conclusions about the meta-game.
Instead, lets talk about the badass that is NewDawn!
NewDawn Fighting!
How many more GSL does Zerg need to win before we acknowledge the very simple fact that late game Zerg macro is uncounterable when the Zerg doesn't screw up something.
It was even said before the release of the beta that Zerg macro would be unbeatable due to huge difference between the macro mechanics (almost linear for protoss and terran, geometric for Zerg).
|
On November 25 2010 11:32 TeWy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2010 11:25 LancerStarcraft wrote:
I don't think everyone should overreact too quickly to this. It's easy to forget that SC2 strategy is still very, very, young. This strat seems very gimmicky to me and in general an overreaction by Terran players to the roach buff since late-game ZvT is skewed toward Zerg right now. This is going to lead to Zergs overreacting to Terran aggression and the match-up is going to wing back and forth like that until it stabilizes.
At the very least wait until the end of this GSL before drawing broad conclusions about the meta-game.
Instead, lets talk about the badass that is NewDawn!
NewDawn Fighting! How many more GSL does Zerg need to win before we acknowledge the very simple fact that late game Zerg macro is uncounterable when the Zerg doesn't screw up something. It was even said before the release of the beta that Zerg macro would be unbeatable due to huge difference between the macro mechanics (almost linear for protoss and terran, geometric for Zerg).
I would point out that the first two OSL Starleagues were won by protosses, and that the first 4 KGPAs were won by Terrans. In fact it wasn't until 2004 until a zerg player won a starleague final.
Two GSLs aren't huge indicators of general strategy trends in the long-term. Pre-release no Zerg wanted to go late game against Terran because Mech play was so good.
Like I said, it's too early to draw broad conclusions about strategy. And before you point out patches, yes I realize zerg has been buffed, and I honestly believed those patches were an over-reaction as well, and I'm former Zerg, now Random player. Everyone just chill and let the meta sort this out.
|
On November 25 2010 12:04 LancerStarcraft wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2010 11:32 TeWy wrote:On November 25 2010 11:25 LancerStarcraft wrote:
I don't think everyone should overreact too quickly to this. It's easy to forget that SC2 strategy is still very, very, young. This strat seems very gimmicky to me and in general an overreaction by Terran players to the roach buff since late-game ZvT is skewed toward Zerg right now. This is going to lead to Zergs overreacting to Terran aggression and the match-up is going to wing back and forth like that until it stabilizes.
At the very least wait until the end of this GSL before drawing broad conclusions about the meta-game.
Instead, lets talk about the badass that is NewDawn!
NewDawn Fighting! How many more GSL does Zerg need to win before we acknowledge the very simple fact that late game Zerg macro is uncounterable when the Zerg doesn't screw up something. It was even said before the release of the beta that Zerg macro would be unbeatable due to huge difference between the macro mechanics (almost linear for protoss and terran, geometric for Zerg). I would point out that the first two OSL Starleagues were won by protosses, and that the first 4 KGPAs were won by Terrans. In fact it wasn't until 2004 until a zerg player won a starleague final. Two GSLs aren't huge indicators of general strategy trends in the long-term. Pre-release no Zerg wanted to go late game against Terran because Mech play was so good. Like I said, it's too early to draw broad conclusions about strategy. And before you point out patches, yes I realize zerg has been buffed, and I honestly believed those patches were an over-reaction as well, and I'm former Zerg, now Random player. Everyone just chill and let the meta sort this out.
I should chill out, but what drives me nutts is that the ones who are now saying "let's wait a little bit before making unnecessary balance changes" are the same who 3 months ago were basically insulting Blizzard for not patching TvZ and continuously posting QQ threads about the state of TvZ even after FD won GSL1 convincingly.
It's the hypocrisy which is killing me.
See where that leaded us.
But in a sense, I would be glad to wait that GSL3 gets won by Zerg and that 50% of the qualified players for GSL4 are Zerg. Just to be able to say "You see, I told you..." ^^
|
All the worthless new zergs who switched from terran are EASILY identifiable :
- 7 or 10 pool
- 40 roaches
- 1a
Same brainless principle than when they played terran :D
|
I'm really glad that this thread made 23 pages. It shows that there is a real problem with the ZvT matchup and I really hope someone at Blizzard is listening. Playing a late game Zerg is virtually impossible to defeat considering how they can larva stack and tech switch on the fly. Larva stacking saves just too many minerals for the Zerg player because they're not required to build multiple production facilities, just the one hatchery.
I know the common Zerg argument is that you have to constantly put pressure on a Zerg player in order to defeat him but that does not mean the game is balanced. Requiring one race to constantly attack the other because the other one is literally a ticking time bomb is a very unfair matchup.
|
On November 25 2010 12:48 Shinkugami wrote:
All the worthless new zergs who switched from terran are EASILY identifiable :
- 7 or 10 pool
- 40 roaches
- 1a
Same brainless principle than when they played terran :D
I wonder if TL.net mgmt is flipping out because you said brainless on a public forum read by thousands of people.
|
On November 25 2010 17:07 SuperBigFoot wrote:
I'm really glad that this thread made 23 pages. It shows that there is a real problem with the ZvT matchup and I really hope someone at Blizzard is listening. Playing a late game Zerg is virtually impossible to defeat considering how they can larva stack and tech switch on the fly. Larva stacking saves just too many minerals for the Zerg player because they're not required to build multiple production facilities, just the one hatchery.
I know the common Zerg argument is that you have to constantly put pressure on a Zerg player in order to defeat him but that does not mean the game is balanced. Requiring one race to constantly attack the other because the other one is literally a ticking time bomb is a very unfair matchup.
Late-game zerg only have the advantage of extra larvae in very narrow circumstances:
1) They need map control and freedom to expand
2) They need a 1 or 2 base advantage over the Terran
3) They need to get a 200/200 army
4) They need enough time after being 200/200 to bank resources and larva
Honestly if you let a zerg get out of hand and mass expand, then allow them to get maxed and bank resources long enough to replenish, then you deserve to lose the game because you played passively.
Jinro's game 3 last night is a perfect example on how to beat Zerg without being super-aggresive. He went two base and used his lone banshee to deny the Zerg expansion to the sides of the map, meanwhile massing a sizable marine/tank force. When the Zerg moved to take a third in the middle, Jinro moved out his army and crushed the Zerg army. The reason he won the battle was because he forced the point of attack into a favorable position for him (The Zerg's third), but the reason he won the game was because he didn't allow the Zerg to expand all over the place.
|
On November 26 2010 03:36 LancerStarcraft wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2010 17:07 SuperBigFoot wrote:
I'm really glad that this thread made 23 pages. It shows that there is a real problem with the ZvT matchup and I really hope someone at Blizzard is listening. Playing a late game Zerg is virtually impossible to defeat considering how they can larva stack and tech switch on the fly. Larva stacking saves just too many minerals for the Zerg player because they're not required to build multiple production facilities, just the one hatchery.
I know the common Zerg argument is that you have to constantly put pressure on a Zerg player in order to defeat him but that does not mean the game is balanced. Requiring one race to constantly attack the other because the other one is literally a ticking time bomb is a very unfair matchup. Late-game zerg only have the advantage of extra larvae in very narrow circumstances: 1) They need map control and freedom to expand 2) They need a 1 or 2 base advantage over the Terran 3) They need to get a 200/200 army 4) They need enough time after being 200/200 to bank resources and larva Honestly if you let a zerg get out of hand and mass expand, then allow them to get maxed and bank resources long enough to replenish, then you deserve to lose the game because you played passively. Jinro's game 3 last night is a perfect example on how to beat Zerg without being super-aggresive. He went two base and used his lone banshee to deny the Zerg expansion to the sides of the map, meanwhile massing a sizable marine/tank force. When the Zerg moved to take a third in the middle, Jinro moved out his army and crushed the Zerg army. The reason he won the battle was because he forced the point of attack into a favorable position for him (The Zerg's third), but the reason he won the game was because he didn't allow the Zerg to expand all over the place.
My post wasn't about how to defeat a Zerg player. My post is about the imbalance issues with the Zerg race and it is clear from your response that we are in agreement that the Zerg race can get out of hand because their late game mechanics is literally broken. Trying to make excuses as to why a Terran player loses is no justification for a broken game. That line of thinking is like saying "She deserved to get raped because she was wearing a short skit" or how Adolf Hitler justified genocide because he believed everyone should be blond with blue eyes. It's a poor justification for something that is wrong and broken. Until Blizzard actually enables a fair opportunity for all races to win during all times of a game, then the TvZ matchup will remain imbalanced, boring, and not fun to play or watch.
|
My post wasn't about how to defeat a Zerg player. My post is about the imbalance issues with the Zerg race and it is clear from your response that we are in agreement that the Zerg race can get out of hand because their late game mechanics is literally broken. Trying to make excuses as to why a Terran player loses is no justification for a broken game. That line of thinking is like saying "She deserved to get raped because she was wearing a short skit" or how Adolf Hitler justified genocide because he believed everyone should be blond with blue eyes. It's a poor justification for something that is wrong and broken. Until Blizzard actually enables a fair opportunity for all races to win during all times of a game, then the TvZ matchup will remain imbalanced, boring, and not fun to play or watch.
Did you seriously just say that video game imbalance is comparable to rape and genocide?
Wtf.
But in a sense, I would be glad to wait that GSL3 gets won by Zerg and that 50% of the qualified players for GSL4 are Zerg. Just to be able to say "You see, I told you..." ^^
Zerg have actually been losing left and right in GSL3. The inability to thumbs down a map really, really fucks them and its showing. If a Zerg gets DQ against a competent Toss or Terran, especially close positions, they will lose most of the time.
|
On November 26 2010 04:52 SuperBigFoot wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2010 03:36 LancerStarcraft wrote:On November 25 2010 17:07 SuperBigFoot wrote:
I'm really glad that this thread made 23 pages. It shows that there is a real problem with the ZvT matchup and I really hope someone at Blizzard is listening. Playing a late game Zerg is virtually impossible to defeat considering how they can larva stack and tech switch on the fly. Larva stacking saves just too many minerals for the Zerg player because they're not required to build multiple production facilities, just the one hatchery.
I know the common Zerg argument is that you have to constantly put pressure on a Zerg player in order to defeat him but that does not mean the game is balanced. Requiring one race to constantly attack the other because the other one is literally a ticking time bomb is a very unfair matchup. Late-game zerg only have the advantage of extra larvae in very narrow circumstances: 1) They need map control and freedom to expand 2) They need a 1 or 2 base advantage over the Terran 3) They need to get a 200/200 army 4) They need enough time after being 200/200 to bank resources and larva Honestly if you let a zerg get out of hand and mass expand, then allow them to get maxed and bank resources long enough to replenish, then you deserve to lose the game because you played passively. Jinro's game 3 last night is a perfect example on how to beat Zerg without being super-aggresive. He went two base and used his lone banshee to deny the Zerg expansion to the sides of the map, meanwhile massing a sizable marine/tank force. When the Zerg moved to take a third in the middle, Jinro moved out his army and crushed the Zerg army. The reason he won the battle was because he forced the point of attack into a favorable position for him (The Zerg's third), but the reason he won the game was because he didn't allow the Zerg to expand all over the place. My post wasn't about how to defeat a Zerg player. My post is about the imbalance issues with the Zerg race and it is clear from your response that we are in agreement that the Zerg race can get out of hand because their late game mechanics is literally broken. Trying to make excuses as to why a Terran player loses is no justification for a broken game. That line of thinking is like saying "She deserved to get raped because she was wearing a short skit" or how Adolf Hitler justified genocide because he believed everyone should be blond with blue eyes. It's a poor justification for something that is wrong and broken. Until Blizzard actually enables a fair opportunity for all races to win during all times of a game, then the TvZ matchup will remain imbalanced, boring, and not fun to play or watch.
Look you're ignoring part of what I'm saying here. The fact is that Zerg only gets a tremendous macro advantage when they are allowed to out expand their opponent. And being honest, how is that different from any other race or matchup? If you let your opponent have map control, and don't deny expansions, you DESERVE to lose the game. If your strategy is to play passive, and then you lose by getting outmacroed by an opponent with more bases, then you played poorly and should have lost.
But it seems that the point you're really trying to make is that you think that Blizzard needs to patch the game to fix something you think is imbalanced. Honestly, patching is half the problem why Terrans are having trouble in the first place. How about instead of looking at less than 3 months of serious competitive play (and even less since patch 1.1.2) just relax and wait for the meta-game to sort this out. It's already happening, Terrans have been playing quite well against Zergs this tournament, so just hang tight, the game will fix itself.
As a closing point, just remember that FruitDealer won the first GSL at the height of all the talk of Zerg being imbalanced.
Edit: And by imbalanced I mean underpowered, Terran was dominating Zerg at all points of the game at the time.
|
TvZ is broken because terran is good early game and sucks late game. That's really all there is to it, stop crying about Terrans doing all-ins/timing pushes when their late game gets rolled over by zerg.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
