I think that the map pool is a good place to start, so many maps are completely terran imba vs zerg ( delta / lt / steppes ) and zerg HAS to allin lol. Also there are other maps that are just BAD for zerg like Jungle basin ( vs T at least, I can't really speak for pvz ). TvP is pretty hard on some maps that are easy for the toss to allin on, and theres some issues that could be adressed, like where protoss can warp into the back of your base on delta quadrant, and thors on a cliff on LT. Some allin's and timing attacks are really strong and its quite frustrating to play vs players that only cheese every game =[.
How did I guess this thread would get hijacked? Am I psychic or just getting used to this forum? Maybe it's like A Beautiful Mind and some people can see a secret message in the OP that says "If we disguise it really well maybe we can sneak a whine thread past the mods - they've been real pills recently".
I'll add my two cents and then get out of the way of all the people who no longer care about the OP.
On December 11 2010 06:41 goldenwitch wrote:
Yes, blizzard has a responsibility to make the game enjoyable as a spectator sport and as a game.
It is Blizzard's responsibility because it is not the player's. This game is seared in my memory and serves as a great example:
From the 2 minute mark Psy predicts how the game will pan out and it all happens. I almost lost the will to live.
Blizzard needs to patch to avoid terminal boredom if nothing else.
On December 12 2010 15:39 my0s wrote: Going to discontinue some other lines of discussion from previous posts as I feel its a waste of my time to argue with uninformed people who feel their general gold league logic is irrefutable fact. Moving on...
Pool first allows you to make spine crawlers in addition to lings. If you spot a two rax rush, pool first and make 2 spine crawlers in addition to lings.
The main restriction of the spinecrawlers is creep. So if you're relying on spinecrawlers then you want the creep at you hatch as quickly as possible. That means going hatch first. I have no idea what you're saying.
That is what pros are saying. It has nothing to do with being greedy. It's that hatch-first is actually superior to holding off the all-in than pool-first.
I dunno. Maybe this is just a FotM kind of deal and it is actually reasonable to hold off. I'll leave that to Blizzard development to figure that out.
On December 12 2010 15:06 AJMcSpiffy wrote: Here's what I will say about your builds though. I'm pretty sure Ret and IdrA have tried those things in their practice sessions. They know what they're doing, playing this game is their job. Without the larvae from a 2nd hatch, a 2 rax will roll over the Zerg, and without the income from an expansion the Zerg can't afford to use the larvae from a 2nd hatchery.
Mostly this.
You have to realize both the mechanics of zerg as well as the economical state it puts the zerg player in when you suggest solutions. Its not the fact that it cannot be held off, although some maps it almost seems like that anyway, its the fact that it cannot be done reasonably and with any kind of reliability. When you know exactly what your opponent is doing, and you cannot respond in a way, such that with equal skill you, with a very high amount of certainty, will be ahead of your opponent. Then it really ceases to be a strategy game.
No I do not proclaim to be certain that it is both unstoppable and imbalanced. But it sure as hell looking that way so far. And when two of the top, if not exactly THE top, english speaking pros sit down for an entire week and try and work it out, I'm going to take heed to their conclusions and advice. And I suggest the rest of you weekend warriors in here do the same, as they are playing this game for their living and at the highest level. And you simply, are not.
It would be nice if a single person arguing against this strat being likely overpowered had any sense of the game at all. YES, it is possible to throw down all kinds of spine crawlers, cut drones, bane tech, or whatever else and hold off the initial attack. But then Terran cuts marine production at like 5 after spotting it, throws down a fast CC with bunkers and rolls you over a few minutes later with an even more powerful force.
Early hatch is not greedy, its just so far the best discovered option of having a chance to deal with this, and not coming out completely eco screwed. And with the way larva works, possibly the best way of trying to deal with this in general. Maybe a good way to handle this is out there, maybe, who knows. But people need to stop sweepingly generally saying QQ zerg you just suck, and pretending they know better than the professionals at this point with zero credibility or justification thereof.
Ret and Idra did not try everything. In fact, there is a famous build that I just thought of now that can be used as the direct counter to 2 rax SCV rush. It's the well known 7RR. SevenRR is the direct counter to 2 rax/SCV rush.
Early hatch is greedy on close spawn positions. If you scout 2 rax SCV rush, yu can get 7 roaches at roughly 5 minutes, which is exactly when the Terran player pushes out with a 2 rax SCV rush. It is only possible to make 10 marines at the 5 minute marker. Seven roaches with all your drones versus 10-12 marines/scvs should be a no brainier, unless you're horrible at micro on your own creep...
This issues all comes down to one thing, Zerg players feeling they are entitled to a free win when they're not even bothering to try out new builds to counter certain strategies.
On December 12 2010 15:39 my0s wrote: Going to discontinue some other lines of discussion from previous posts as I feel its a waste of my time to argue with uninformed people who feel their general gold league logic is irrefutable fact. Moving on...
On December 12 2010 15:04 DoubleReed wrote:
Pool first allows you to make spine crawlers in addition to lings. If you spot a two rax rush, pool first and make 2 spine crawlers in addition to lings.
The main restriction of the spinecrawlers is creep. So if you're relying on spinecrawlers then you want the creep at you hatch as quickly as possible. That means going hatch first. I have no idea what you're saying.
That is what pros are saying. It has nothing to do with being greedy. It's that hatch-first is actually superior to holding off the all-in than pool-first.
I dunno. Maybe this is just a FotM kind of deal and it is actually reasonable to hold off. I'll leave that to Blizzard development to figure that out.
On December 12 2010 15:06 AJMcSpiffy wrote: Here's what I will say about your builds though. I'm pretty sure Ret and IdrA have tried those things in their practice sessions. They know what they're doing, playing this game is their job. Without the larvae from a 2nd hatch, a 2 rax will roll over the Zerg, and without the income from an expansion the Zerg can't afford to use the larvae from a 2nd hatchery.
Mostly this.
You have to realize both the mechanics of zerg as well as the economical state it puts the zerg player in when you suggest solutions. Its not the fact that it cannot be held off, although some maps it almost seems like that anyway, its the fact that it cannot be done reasonably and with any kind of reliability. When you know exactly what your opponent is doing, and you cannot respond in a way, such that with equal skill you, with a very high amount of certainty, will be ahead of your opponent. Then it really ceases to be a strategy game.
No I do not proclaim to be certain that it is both unstoppable and imbalanced. But it sure as hell looking that way so far. And when two of the top, if not exactly THE top, english speaking pros sit down for an entire week and try and work it out, I'm going to take heed to their conclusions and advice. And I suggest the rest of you weekend warriors in here do the same, as they are playing this game for their living and at the highest level. And you simply, are not.
It would be nice if a single person arguing against this strat being likely overpowered had any sense of the game at all. YES, it is possible to throw down all kinds of spine crawlers, cut drones, bane tech, or whatever else and hold off the initial attack. But then Terran cuts marine production at like 5 after spotting it, throws down a fast CC with bunkers and rolls you over a few minutes later with an even more powerful force.
Early hatch is not greedy, its just so far the best discovered option of having a chance to deal with this, and not coming out completely eco screwed. And with the way larva works, possibly the best way of trying to deal with this in general. Maybe a good way to handle this is out there, maybe, who knows. But people need to stop sweepingly generally saying QQ zerg you just suck, and pretending they know better than the professionals at this point with zero credibility or justification thereof.
Ret and Idra did not try everything. In fact, there is a famous build that I just thought of now that can be used as the direct counter to 2 rax SCV rush. It's the well known 7RR. SevenRR is the direct counter to 2 rax/SCV rush.
Early hatch is greedy on close spawn positions. If you scout 2 rax SCV rush, yu can get 7 roaches at roughly 5 minutes, which is exactly when the Terran player pushes out with a 2 rax SCV rush. It is only possible to make 10 marines at the 5 minute marker. Seven roaches with all your drones versus 10-12 marines/scvs should be a no brainier, unless you're horrible at micro on your own creep...
This issues all comes down to one thing, Zerg players feeling they are entitled to a free win when they're not even bothering to try out new builds to counter certain strategies.
I just have to point out there is NO transition out of 7 roach rush and that is indeed an all-in. This differs greatly from 2 rax play since if the terran scouts 1base roach play he can just opt to wall in and bunker and continue playing standard and transition normally. (Well he might have to cut 1 scv at some point, no biggie compared to the sacrifices zerg had to make to pull the all-in off)
Ret and Idra did not try everything. In fact, there is a famous build that I just thought of now that can be used as the direct counter to 2 rax SCV rush. It's the well known 7RR. SevenRR is the direct counter to 2 rax/SCV rush.
Uhm. Wouldn't the terran just see the 1basing, roach-making zerg? And then opt to not early attack him. I'm pretty sure terran gets a massive scouting advantage. Terran is not forced to attack if he makes some marines off of 2rax. If zerg does the 7RR, he will be extremely behind if his roaches don't do anything.
On December 12 2010 15:39 my0s wrote: Going to discontinue some other lines of discussion from previous posts as I feel its a waste of my time to argue with uninformed people who feel their general gold league logic is irrefutable fact. Moving on...
On December 12 2010 15:04 DoubleReed wrote:
Pool first allows you to make spine crawlers in addition to lings. If you spot a two rax rush, pool first and make 2 spine crawlers in addition to lings.
The main restriction of the spinecrawlers is creep. So if you're relying on spinecrawlers then you want the creep at you hatch as quickly as possible. That means going hatch first. I have no idea what you're saying.
That is what pros are saying. It has nothing to do with being greedy. It's that hatch-first is actually superior to holding off the all-in than pool-first.
I dunno. Maybe this is just a FotM kind of deal and it is actually reasonable to hold off. I'll leave that to Blizzard development to figure that out.
On December 12 2010 15:06 AJMcSpiffy wrote: Here's what I will say about your builds though. I'm pretty sure Ret and IdrA have tried those things in their practice sessions. They know what they're doing, playing this game is their job. Without the larvae from a 2nd hatch, a 2 rax will roll over the Zerg, and without the income from an expansion the Zerg can't afford to use the larvae from a 2nd hatchery.
Mostly this.
You have to realize both the mechanics of zerg as well as the economical state it puts the zerg player in when you suggest solutions. Its not the fact that it cannot be held off, although some maps it almost seems like that anyway, its the fact that it cannot be done reasonably and with any kind of reliability. When you know exactly what your opponent is doing, and you cannot respond in a way, such that with equal skill you, with a very high amount of certainty, will be ahead of your opponent. Then it really ceases to be a strategy game.
No I do not proclaim to be certain that it is both unstoppable and imbalanced. But it sure as hell looking that way so far. And when two of the top, if not exactly THE top, english speaking pros sit down for an entire week and try and work it out, I'm going to take heed to their conclusions and advice. And I suggest the rest of you weekend warriors in here do the same, as they are playing this game for their living and at the highest level. And you simply, are not.
It would be nice if a single person arguing against this strat being likely overpowered had any sense of the game at all. YES, it is possible to throw down all kinds of spine crawlers, cut drones, bane tech, or whatever else and hold off the initial attack. But then Terran cuts marine production at like 5 after spotting it, throws down a fast CC with bunkers and rolls you over a few minutes later with an even more powerful force.
Early hatch is not greedy, its just so far the best discovered option of having a chance to deal with this, and not coming out completely eco screwed. And with the way larva works, possibly the best way of trying to deal with this in general. Maybe a good way to handle this is out there, maybe, who knows. But people need to stop sweepingly generally saying QQ zerg you just suck, and pretending they know better than the professionals at this point with zero credibility or justification thereof.
Ret and Idra did not try everything. In fact, there is a famous build that I just thought of now that can be used as the direct counter to 2 rax SCV rush. It's the well known 7RR. SevenRR is the direct counter to 2 rax/SCV rush.
Early hatch is greedy on close spawn positions. If you scout 2 rax SCV rush, yu can get 7 roaches at roughly 5 minutes, which is exactly when the Terran player pushes out with a 2 rax SCV rush. It is only possible to make 10 marines at the 5 minute marker. Seven roaches with all your drones versus 10-12 marines/scvs should be a no brainier, unless you're horrible at micro on your own creep...
This issues all comes down to one thing, Zerg players feeling they are entitled to a free win when they're not even bothering to try out new builds to counter certain strategies.
I just have to point out there is NO transition out of 7 roach rush and that is indeed an all-in. This differs greatly from 2 rax play since if the terran scouts 1base roach play he can just opt to wall in and bunker and continue playing standard and transition normally. (Well he might have to cut 1 scv at some point, no biggie compared to the sacrifices zerg had to make to pull the all-in off)
So it boils down to who is the better scouter? Which means it has nothing to do with marine/SCV build being overpowered, unstoppable, and the ultimate win scenario. And that Zerg players such as yourself feel entitled to have the ultimate, overpowered, unstoppable, greedy, economically, transition friendly build of all time...
Ret and Idra did not try everything. In fact, there is a famous build that I just thought of now that can be used as the direct counter to 2 rax SCV rush. It's the well known 7RR. SevenRR is the direct counter to 2 rax/SCV rush.
Uhm. Wouldn't the terran just see the 1basing, roach-making zerg? And then opt to not early attack him. I'm pretty sure terran gets a massive scouting advantage. Terran is not forced to attack if he makes some marines off of 2rax. If zerg does the 7RR, he will be extremely behind if his roaches don't do anything.
All-in vs All-in is about as unstable as it gets.
Try making 2 lings to kill the scout to end up with 6 roaches instead of 7. You'll still have the advantage. Point is, pooling first opens more options for Zerg players to deal with marine/SCV rushes then going hatchery first. You don't have to go 7RR. You could make 3 spine crawlers instead. However, you for some reason, feel that the game must be an automatic Zerg win for some reason.
I think the race balance is pretty good now. Next stop is game length trajectory balancing, which of course could be tough to change without changing race balance. At least ZvZ is much better than SC1 in this regard.
On December 12 2010 17:29 SixtusTheFifth wrote: How did I guess this thread would get hijacked? Am I psychic or just getting used to this forum? Maybe it's like A Beautiful Mind and some people can see a secret message in the OP that says "If we disguise it really well maybe we can sneak a whine thread past the mods - they've been real pills recently".
I'll add my two cents and then get out of the way of all the people who no longer care about the OP.
On December 12 2010 15:39 my0s wrote: Going to discontinue some other lines of discussion from previous posts as I feel its a waste of my time to argue with uninformed people who feel their general gold league logic is irrefutable fact. Moving on...
On December 12 2010 15:04 DoubleReed wrote:
Pool first allows you to make spine crawlers in addition to lings. If you spot a two rax rush, pool first and make 2 spine crawlers in addition to lings.
The main restriction of the spinecrawlers is creep. So if you're relying on spinecrawlers then you want the creep at you hatch as quickly as possible. That means going hatch first. I have no idea what you're saying.
That is what pros are saying. It has nothing to do with being greedy. It's that hatch-first is actually superior to holding off the all-in than pool-first.
I dunno. Maybe this is just a FotM kind of deal and it is actually reasonable to hold off. I'll leave that to Blizzard development to figure that out.
On December 12 2010 15:06 AJMcSpiffy wrote: Here's what I will say about your builds though. I'm pretty sure Ret and IdrA have tried those things in their practice sessions. They know what they're doing, playing this game is their job. Without the larvae from a 2nd hatch, a 2 rax will roll over the Zerg, and without the income from an expansion the Zerg can't afford to use the larvae from a 2nd hatchery.
Mostly this.
You have to realize both the mechanics of zerg as well as the economical state it puts the zerg player in when you suggest solutions. Its not the fact that it cannot be held off, although some maps it almost seems like that anyway, its the fact that it cannot be done reasonably and with any kind of reliability. When you know exactly what your opponent is doing, and you cannot respond in a way, such that with equal skill you, with a very high amount of certainty, will be ahead of your opponent. Then it really ceases to be a strategy game.
No I do not proclaim to be certain that it is both unstoppable and imbalanced. But it sure as hell looking that way so far. And when two of the top, if not exactly THE top, english speaking pros sit down for an entire week and try and work it out, I'm going to take heed to their conclusions and advice. And I suggest the rest of you weekend warriors in here do the same, as they are playing this game for their living and at the highest level. And you simply, are not.
It would be nice if a single person arguing against this strat being likely overpowered had any sense of the game at all. YES, it is possible to throw down all kinds of spine crawlers, cut drones, bane tech, or whatever else and hold off the initial attack. But then Terran cuts marine production at like 5 after spotting it, throws down a fast CC with bunkers and rolls you over a few minutes later with an even more powerful force.
Early hatch is not greedy, its just so far the best discovered option of having a chance to deal with this, and not coming out completely eco screwed. And with the way larva works, possibly the best way of trying to deal with this in general. Maybe a good way to handle this is out there, maybe, who knows. But people need to stop sweepingly generally saying QQ zerg you just suck, and pretending they know better than the professionals at this point with zero credibility or justification thereof.
Ret and Idra did not try everything. In fact, there is a famous build that I just thought of now that can be used as the direct counter to 2 rax SCV rush. It's the well known 7RR. SevenRR is the direct counter to 2 rax/SCV rush.
Early hatch is greedy on close spawn positions. If you scout 2 rax SCV rush, yu can get 7 roaches at roughly 5 minutes, which is exactly when the Terran player pushes out with a 2 rax SCV rush. It is only possible to make 10 marines at the 5 minute marker. Seven roaches with all your drones versus 10-12 marines/scvs should be a no brainier, unless you're horrible at micro on your own creep...
This issues all comes down to one thing, Zerg players feeling they are entitled to a free win when they're not even bothering to try out new builds to counter certain strategies.
I just have to point out there is NO transition out of 7 roach rush and that is indeed an all-in. This differs greatly from 2 rax play since if the terran scouts 1base roach play he can just opt to wall in and bunker and continue playing standard and transition normally. (Well he might have to cut 1 scv at some point, no biggie compared to the sacrifices zerg had to make to pull the all-in off)
So it boils down to who is the better scouter? Which means it has nothing to do with marine/SCV build being overpowered, unstoppable, and the ultimate win scenario. And that Zerg players such as yourself feel entitled to have the ultimate, overpowered, unstoppable, greedy, economically, transition friendly build of all time...
Ret and Idra did not try everything. In fact, there is a famous build that I just thought of now that can be used as the direct counter to 2 rax SCV rush. It's the well known 7RR. SevenRR is the direct counter to 2 rax/SCV rush.
Uhm. Wouldn't the terran just see the 1basing, roach-making zerg? And then opt to not early attack him. I'm pretty sure terran gets a massive scouting advantage. Terran is not forced to attack if he makes some marines off of 2rax. If zerg does the 7RR, he will be extremely behind if his roaches don't do anything.
All-in vs All-in is about as unstable as it gets.
Try making 2 lings to kill the scout to end up with 6 roaches instead of 7. You'll still have the advantage. Point is, pooling first opens more options for Zerg players to deal with marine/SCV rushes then going hatchery first. You don't have to go 7RR. You could make 3 spine crawlers instead. However, you for some reason, feel that the game must be an automatic Zerg win for some reason.
2rax is not an all-in by any means before you pull the scvs - which you really should not do if you are not certain there is a really greedy build on the zerg, and the build gives really great early aggression with no sacrifices when you don't pull the scv's. 7roach rush is an all-in with no transition at all. So it does not boil down to "who is the best scouter" - zerg can scout 2rax and decide to go 7RR and then terran sees no expansion and does not attack -> autolose for zerg.. and it is trivial to get that much information to both players. 7RR just is not an answer if the 2raxing terran has any brains at all.
And if you claim you can do a 7RR and NOT build the roaches but opt to go for spine crawlers instead, that is just a horrible idea since you will get like half of the economy of the terran going in the midgame. Test it if you don't believe me.
If wanting an equal economy as your opponent early-midgame is greedy and wanting an autowin, I plead quilty indeed.
EDIT: Oh and to reply to the actual topic as well, I really think these all-ins should be less effective. Around 40% win would be acceptable, now a lot weaker player (judging by mechanics and late game performance, where you need to actually make multiple decisions) can win too often just by perfecting one early game strategy. Defending those strategies is a lot harder since different players do them a little bit differently every time (different amount of scv's, different timings, bunkers etc.) -> practicing is not as easy for the defender as it is for the attacker. I've actually paid for this GSL season and I almost hope for a refund, such boring all-in(ish) play all around, not just TvZ. Luckily there was a few epic series there as well tho.
On December 12 2010 15:39 my0s wrote: Going to discontinue some other lines of discussion from previous posts as I feel its a waste of my time to argue with uninformed people who feel their general gold league logic is irrefutable fact. Moving on...
On December 12 2010 15:04 DoubleReed wrote:
Pool first allows you to make spine crawlers in addition to lings. If you spot a two rax rush, pool first and make 2 spine crawlers in addition to lings.
The main restriction of the spinecrawlers is creep. So if you're relying on spinecrawlers then you want the creep at you hatch as quickly as possible. That means going hatch first. I have no idea what you're saying.
That is what pros are saying. It has nothing to do with being greedy. It's that hatch-first is actually superior to holding off the all-in than pool-first.
I dunno. Maybe this is just a FotM kind of deal and it is actually reasonable to hold off. I'll leave that to Blizzard development to figure that out.
On December 12 2010 15:06 AJMcSpiffy wrote: Here's what I will say about your builds though. I'm pretty sure Ret and IdrA have tried those things in their practice sessions. They know what they're doing, playing this game is their job. Without the larvae from a 2nd hatch, a 2 rax will roll over the Zerg, and without the income from an expansion the Zerg can't afford to use the larvae from a 2nd hatchery.
Mostly this.
You have to realize both the mechanics of zerg as well as the economical state it puts the zerg player in when you suggest solutions. Its not the fact that it cannot be held off, although some maps it almost seems like that anyway, its the fact that it cannot be done reasonably and with any kind of reliability. When you know exactly what your opponent is doing, and you cannot respond in a way, such that with equal skill you, with a very high amount of certainty, will be ahead of your opponent. Then it really ceases to be a strategy game.
No I do not proclaim to be certain that it is both unstoppable and imbalanced. But it sure as hell looking that way so far. And when two of the top, if not exactly THE top, english speaking pros sit down for an entire week and try and work it out, I'm going to take heed to their conclusions and advice. And I suggest the rest of you weekend warriors in here do the same, as they are playing this game for their living and at the highest level. And you simply, are not.
It would be nice if a single person arguing against this strat being likely overpowered had any sense of the game at all. YES, it is possible to throw down all kinds of spine crawlers, cut drones, bane tech, or whatever else and hold off the initial attack. But then Terran cuts marine production at like 5 after spotting it, throws down a fast CC with bunkers and rolls you over a few minutes later with an even more powerful force.
Early hatch is not greedy, its just so far the best discovered option of having a chance to deal with this, and not coming out completely eco screwed. And with the way larva works, possibly the best way of trying to deal with this in general. Maybe a good way to handle this is out there, maybe, who knows. But people need to stop sweepingly generally saying QQ zerg you just suck, and pretending they know better than the professionals at this point with zero credibility or justification thereof.
Ret and Idra did not try everything. In fact, there is a famous build that I just thought of now that can be used as the direct counter to 2 rax SCV rush. It's the well known 7RR. SevenRR is the direct counter to 2 rax/SCV rush.
Early hatch is greedy on close spawn positions. If you scout 2 rax SCV rush, yu can get 7 roaches at roughly 5 minutes, which is exactly when the Terran player pushes out with a 2 rax SCV rush. It is only possible to make 10 marines at the 5 minute marker. Seven roaches with all your drones versus 10-12 marines/scvs should be a no brainier, unless you're horrible at micro on your own creep...
This issues all comes down to one thing, Zerg players feeling they are entitled to a free win when they're not even bothering to try out new builds to counter certain strategies.
I just have to point out there is NO transition out of 7 roach rush and that is indeed an all-in. This differs greatly from 2 rax play since if the terran scouts 1base roach play he can just opt to wall in and bunker and continue playing standard and transition normally. (Well he might have to cut 1 scv at some point, no biggie compared to the sacrifices zerg had to make to pull the all-in off)
So it boils down to who is the better scouter? Which means it has nothing to do with marine/SCV build being overpowered, unstoppable, and the ultimate win scenario. And that Zerg players such as yourself feel entitled to have the ultimate, overpowered, unstoppable, greedy, economically, transition friendly build of all time...
On December 12 2010 18:37 DoubleReed wrote:
Ret and Idra did not try everything. In fact, there is a famous build that I just thought of now that can be used as the direct counter to 2 rax SCV rush. It's the well known 7RR. SevenRR is the direct counter to 2 rax/SCV rush.
Uhm. Wouldn't the terran just see the 1basing, roach-making zerg? And then opt to not early attack him. I'm pretty sure terran gets a massive scouting advantage. Terran is not forced to attack if he makes some marines off of 2rax. If zerg does the 7RR, he will be extremely behind if his roaches don't do anything.
All-in vs All-in is about as unstable as it gets.
Try making 2 lings to kill the scout to end up with 6 roaches instead of 7. You'll still have the advantage. Point is, pooling first opens more options for Zerg players to deal with marine/SCV rushes then going hatchery first. You don't have to go 7RR. You could make 3 spine crawlers instead. However, you for some reason, feel that the game must be an automatic Zerg win for some reason.
2rax is not an all-in by any means before you pull the scvs - which you really should not do if you are not certain there is a really greedy build on the zerg, and the build gives really great early aggression with no sacrifices when you don't pull the scv's. 7roach rush is an all-in with no transition at all. So it does not boil down to "who is the best scouter" - zerg can scout 2rax and decide to go 7RR and then terran sees no expansion and does not attack -> autolose for zerg.. and it is trivial to get that much information to both players. 7RR just is not an answer if the 2raxing terran has any brains at all.
And if you claim you can do a 7RR and NOT build the roaches but opt to go for spine crawlers instead, that is just a horrible idea since you will get like half of the economy of the terran going in the midgame. Test it if you don't believe me.
If wanting an equal economy as your opponent early-midgame is greedy and wanting an autowin, I plead quilty indeed.
No.... I said putting down a spawn pool at close positions opens up more options to deal with marine SCV rush then putting down a hatch first.
Option 1: 7RR Option 2: Build 3 spine crawlers and make some lings Option 3: Making banelings....If you can afford 7RR, you can afford Banelings Option 4: Make a second hatch if your scout does not see 2 rax without a refinery.
Why is it so complicated for Zerg players to understand that there are viable counters to marine/SCV rushes? It's really just common sense that you have more options if you drop a pool first and scout accordingly at close positions.
On December 12 2010 15:39 my0s wrote: Going to discontinue some other lines of discussion from previous posts as I feel its a waste of my time to argue with uninformed people who feel their general gold league logic is irrefutable fact. Moving on...
On December 12 2010 15:04 DoubleReed wrote:
Pool first allows you to make spine crawlers in addition to lings. If you spot a two rax rush, pool first and make 2 spine crawlers in addition to lings.
The main restriction of the spinecrawlers is creep. So if you're relying on spinecrawlers then you want the creep at you hatch as quickly as possible. That means going hatch first. I have no idea what you're saying.
That is what pros are saying. It has nothing to do with being greedy. It's that hatch-first is actually superior to holding off the all-in than pool-first.
I dunno. Maybe this is just a FotM kind of deal and it is actually reasonable to hold off. I'll leave that to Blizzard development to figure that out.
On December 12 2010 15:06 AJMcSpiffy wrote: Here's what I will say about your builds though. I'm pretty sure Ret and IdrA have tried those things in their practice sessions. They know what they're doing, playing this game is their job. Without the larvae from a 2nd hatch, a 2 rax will roll over the Zerg, and without the income from an expansion the Zerg can't afford to use the larvae from a 2nd hatchery.
Mostly this.
You have to realize both the mechanics of zerg as well as the economical state it puts the zerg player in when you suggest solutions. Its not the fact that it cannot be held off, although some maps it almost seems like that anyway, its the fact that it cannot be done reasonably and with any kind of reliability. When you know exactly what your opponent is doing, and you cannot respond in a way, such that with equal skill you, with a very high amount of certainty, will be ahead of your opponent. Then it really ceases to be a strategy game.
No I do not proclaim to be certain that it is both unstoppable and imbalanced. But it sure as hell looking that way so far. And when two of the top, if not exactly THE top, english speaking pros sit down for an entire week and try and work it out, I'm going to take heed to their conclusions and advice. And I suggest the rest of you weekend warriors in here do the same, as they are playing this game for their living and at the highest level. And you simply, are not.
It would be nice if a single person arguing against this strat being likely overpowered had any sense of the game at all. YES, it is possible to throw down all kinds of spine crawlers, cut drones, bane tech, or whatever else and hold off the initial attack. But then Terran cuts marine production at like 5 after spotting it, throws down a fast CC with bunkers and rolls you over a few minutes later with an even more powerful force.
Early hatch is not greedy, its just so far the best discovered option of having a chance to deal with this, and not coming out completely eco screwed. And with the way larva works, possibly the best way of trying to deal with this in general. Maybe a good way to handle this is out there, maybe, who knows. But people need to stop sweepingly generally saying QQ zerg you just suck, and pretending they know better than the professionals at this point with zero credibility or justification thereof.
Ret and Idra did not try everything. In fact, there is a famous build that I just thought of now that can be used as the direct counter to 2 rax SCV rush. It's the well known 7RR. SevenRR is the direct counter to 2 rax/SCV rush.
Early hatch is greedy on close spawn positions. If you scout 2 rax SCV rush, yu can get 7 roaches at roughly 5 minutes, which is exactly when the Terran player pushes out with a 2 rax SCV rush. It is only possible to make 10 marines at the 5 minute marker. Seven roaches with all your drones versus 10-12 marines/scvs should be a no brainier, unless you're horrible at micro on your own creep...
This issues all comes down to one thing, Zerg players feeling they are entitled to a free win when they're not even bothering to try out new builds to counter certain strategies.
I just have to point out there is NO transition out of 7 roach rush and that is indeed an all-in. This differs greatly from 2 rax play since if the terran scouts 1base roach play he can just opt to wall in and bunker and continue playing standard and transition normally. (Well he might have to cut 1 scv at some point, no biggie compared to the sacrifices zerg had to make to pull the all-in off)
So it boils down to who is the better scouter? Which means it has nothing to do with marine/SCV build being overpowered, unstoppable, and the ultimate win scenario. And that Zerg players such as yourself feel entitled to have the ultimate, overpowered, unstoppable, greedy, economically, transition friendly build of all time...
On December 12 2010 18:37 DoubleReed wrote:
Ret and Idra did not try everything. In fact, there is a famous build that I just thought of now that can be used as the direct counter to 2 rax SCV rush. It's the well known 7RR. SevenRR is the direct counter to 2 rax/SCV rush.
Uhm. Wouldn't the terran just see the 1basing, roach-making zerg? And then opt to not early attack him. I'm pretty sure terran gets a massive scouting advantage. Terran is not forced to attack if he makes some marines off of 2rax. If zerg does the 7RR, he will be extremely behind if his roaches don't do anything.
All-in vs All-in is about as unstable as it gets.
Try making 2 lings to kill the scout to end up with 6 roaches instead of 7. You'll still have the advantage. Point is, pooling first opens more options for Zerg players to deal with marine/SCV rushes then going hatchery first. You don't have to go 7RR. You could make 3 spine crawlers instead. However, you for some reason, feel that the game must be an automatic Zerg win for some reason.
2rax is not an all-in by any means before you pull the scvs - which you really should not do if you are not certain there is a really greedy build on the zerg, and the build gives really great early aggression with no sacrifices when you don't pull the scv's. 7roach rush is an all-in with no transition at all. So it does not boil down to "who is the best scouter" - zerg can scout 2rax and decide to go 7RR and then terran sees no expansion and does not attack -> autolose for zerg.. and it is trivial to get that much information to both players. 7RR just is not an answer if the 2raxing terran has any brains at all.
And if you claim you can do a 7RR and NOT build the roaches but opt to go for spine crawlers instead, that is just a horrible idea since you will get like half of the economy of the terran going in the midgame. Test it if you don't believe me.
If wanting an equal economy as your opponent early-midgame is greedy and wanting an autowin, I plead quilty indeed.
No.... I said putting down a spawn pool at close positions opens up more options to deal with marine SCV rush then putting down a hatch first.
Option 1: 7RR Option 2: Build 3 spine crawlers and make some lings Option 3: Making banelings....If you can afford 7RR, you can surly afford Banelings
Why is it so complicated for Zerg players to understand that there are viable counters to marine/SCV rushes? It's really just common sense that you have more options if you drop a pool first and scout accordingly at close positions.
Well.. for a slightly delayed 2rax attack you need extra larva to defend efficiently, this can be done either by cutting a lot of drones and lagging in economy (which kills you later obviously) or making another hatch, which could be made in the main base, but is not really sensible since you need to make a 3rd hatchery after you fend off the initial pressure IF the terran still decides to do it.
I've experimented with a speedling opener, (14gas14pool21hatch) which can fend off the early pressure, but I've constantly lagged behind in economy and died a bit later to a marine/marauder stim timing when the opponent has significantly larger army due to the better economy he gets. Best winning percentage seems to be with 14hatch16pool21gas for me with 1-2 spine crawlers at natural against 2rax pressure. You should really try to play against this type of pressure as zerg before dishing out wisdom like that. :/
if Terran had some decent lategame options we wouldn't have to rely on early pressure vs P and especially Z.
edit: maybe a speed upgrade at that BC building? I'm a T player and I cannot even remember the name of the building lol
edit2: just a quick thought at least, BC's are not an option right now which is sad because they are awesome, but they can be kited to death so easily.
On December 12 2010 15:39 my0s wrote: Going to discontinue some other lines of discussion from previous posts as I feel its a waste of my time to argue with uninformed people who feel their general gold league logic is irrefutable fact. Moving on...
On December 12 2010 15:04 DoubleReed wrote:
Pool first allows you to make spine crawlers in addition to lings. If you spot a two rax rush, pool first and make 2 spine crawlers in addition to lings.
The main restriction of the spinecrawlers is creep. So if you're relying on spinecrawlers then you want the creep at you hatch as quickly as possible. That means going hatch first. I have no idea what you're saying.
That is what pros are saying. It has nothing to do with being greedy. It's that hatch-first is actually superior to holding off the all-in than pool-first.
I dunno. Maybe this is just a FotM kind of deal and it is actually reasonable to hold off. I'll leave that to Blizzard development to figure that out.
On December 12 2010 15:06 AJMcSpiffy wrote: Here's what I will say about your builds though. I'm pretty sure Ret and IdrA have tried those things in their practice sessions. They know what they're doing, playing this game is their job. Without the larvae from a 2nd hatch, a 2 rax will roll over the Zerg, and without the income from an expansion the Zerg can't afford to use the larvae from a 2nd hatchery.
Mostly this.
You have to realize both the mechanics of zerg as well as the economical state it puts the zerg player in when you suggest solutions. Its not the fact that it cannot be held off, although some maps it almost seems like that anyway, its the fact that it cannot be done reasonably and with any kind of reliability. When you know exactly what your opponent is doing, and you cannot respond in a way, such that with equal skill you, with a very high amount of certainty, will be ahead of your opponent. Then it really ceases to be a strategy game.
No I do not proclaim to be certain that it is both unstoppable and imbalanced. But it sure as hell looking that way so far. And when two of the top, if not exactly THE top, english speaking pros sit down for an entire week and try and work it out, I'm going to take heed to their conclusions and advice. And I suggest the rest of you weekend warriors in here do the same, as they are playing this game for their living and at the highest level. And you simply, are not.
It would be nice if a single person arguing against this strat being likely overpowered had any sense of the game at all. YES, it is possible to throw down all kinds of spine crawlers, cut drones, bane tech, or whatever else and hold off the initial attack. But then Terran cuts marine production at like 5 after spotting it, throws down a fast CC with bunkers and rolls you over a few minutes later with an even more powerful force.
Early hatch is not greedy, its just so far the best discovered option of having a chance to deal with this, and not coming out completely eco screwed. And with the way larva works, possibly the best way of trying to deal with this in general. Maybe a good way to handle this is out there, maybe, who knows. But people need to stop sweepingly generally saying QQ zerg you just suck, and pretending they know better than the professionals at this point with zero credibility or justification thereof.
Ret and Idra did not try everything. In fact, there is a famous build that I just thought of now that can be used as the direct counter to 2 rax SCV rush. It's the well known 7RR. SevenRR is the direct counter to 2 rax/SCV rush.
Early hatch is greedy on close spawn positions. If you scout 2 rax SCV rush, yu can get 7 roaches at roughly 5 minutes, which is exactly when the Terran player pushes out with a 2 rax SCV rush. It is only possible to make 10 marines at the 5 minute marker. Seven roaches with all your drones versus 10-12 marines/scvs should be a no brainier, unless you're horrible at micro on your own creep...
This issues all comes down to one thing, Zerg players feeling they are entitled to a free win when they're not even bothering to try out new builds to counter certain strategies.
I just have to point out there is NO transition out of 7 roach rush and that is indeed an all-in. This differs greatly from 2 rax play since if the terran scouts 1base roach play he can just opt to wall in and bunker and continue playing standard and transition normally. (Well he might have to cut 1 scv at some point, no biggie compared to the sacrifices zerg had to make to pull the all-in off)
So it boils down to who is the better scouter? Which means it has nothing to do with marine/SCV build being overpowered, unstoppable, and the ultimate win scenario. And that Zerg players such as yourself feel entitled to have the ultimate, overpowered, unstoppable, greedy, economically, transition friendly build of all time...
On December 12 2010 18:37 DoubleReed wrote:
Ret and Idra did not try everything. In fact, there is a famous build that I just thought of now that can be used as the direct counter to 2 rax SCV rush. It's the well known 7RR. SevenRR is the direct counter to 2 rax/SCV rush.
Uhm. Wouldn't the terran just see the 1basing, roach-making zerg? And then opt to not early attack him. I'm pretty sure terran gets a massive scouting advantage. Terran is not forced to attack if he makes some marines off of 2rax. If zerg does the 7RR, he will be extremely behind if his roaches don't do anything.
All-in vs All-in is about as unstable as it gets.
Try making 2 lings to kill the scout to end up with 6 roaches instead of 7. You'll still have the advantage. Point is, pooling first opens more options for Zerg players to deal with marine/SCV rushes then going hatchery first. You don't have to go 7RR. You could make 3 spine crawlers instead. However, you for some reason, feel that the game must be an automatic Zerg win for some reason.
2rax is not an all-in by any means before you pull the scvs - which you really should not do if you are not certain there is a really greedy build on the zerg, and the build gives really great early aggression with no sacrifices when you don't pull the scv's. 7roach rush is an all-in with no transition at all. So it does not boil down to "who is the best scouter" - zerg can scout 2rax and decide to go 7RR and then terran sees no expansion and does not attack -> autolose for zerg.. and it is trivial to get that much information to both players. 7RR just is not an answer if the 2raxing terran has any brains at all.
And if you claim you can do a 7RR and NOT build the roaches but opt to go for spine crawlers instead, that is just a horrible idea since you will get like half of the economy of the terran going in the midgame. Test it if you don't believe me.
If wanting an equal economy as your opponent early-midgame is greedy and wanting an autowin, I plead quilty indeed.
No.... I said putting down a spawn pool at close positions opens up more options to deal with marine SCV rush then putting down a hatch first.
Option 1: 7RR Option 2: Build 3 spine crawlers and make some lings Option 3: Making banelings....If you can afford 7RR, you can afford Banelings Option 4: Make a second hatch if your scout does not see 2 rax without a refinery.
Why is it so complicated for Zerg players to understand that there are viable counters to marine/SCV rushes? It's really just common sense that you have more options if you drop a pool first and scout accordingly at close positions.
It's as if you're not even reading the posts you're replying to. I explained why a hatchery is NOT an autowin, it's needed to stay on equal production with the terran once you leave the early game. The hallmark of a stable build is its ability to have a second step (as Day[9] puts it, I'm paraphrasing though). Lets look at your suggested builds: 1: 7RR - A far more easily scouted all-in to try and counter a different all-in? That is not how a game should have to go. 2: The zerg is supposed to throw away 300 minerals and 3 drones to stop an early rush, but then how would that leave any chance for a recovery into the midgame? The economy of the zerg would be so far behind the Terran if he leaves a few SCVs behind and uses his MULES. 3: 1 base slow banelings? This would have worked before Terran players learned to micro their marines. Slow banes are not worth it without speedlings to surround and contain, but again we hit the problem of trying to do too much off of one base and with too few larvae. 4: And when your scout is stopped at the ramp, are you supposed to just result to one of the other all-in options?
The hatch-first build is the best chance a Zerg has to defend a 2 rax while ending up on even footing after the rush is over. The game does not just suddenly end if the zerg manages to hold off the initial push from the 2 rax, there is still a mid game that they need to be ready for. And to cripple yourself so hard just to defend the first push in the game is not the proper response.
All-in's are a viable and necessary part of the game. How much fun would rock-paper-scissors be if the game became rock-paper?
An all-in early attack is the proper response to a an opponent doing a huge econ build. If you can't defend an early attack, it is because you invested too much in your economy and did not scout your opponent well enough. The attacking workers are necessary because the defender will employ his workers and then the attack would fail, even if you had superior numbers.
Larger maps. Lower income. Lower all damage vs. buildings from all units except workers. Make naturals that lack gas.
IMO: If two players are on equal footing. I.e no one is ahead or behind. Then if I scout someone all-in, I should be able to defend it AND be ahead, due to defenders advantage.
If I do not scout it, get tricked or already am behind then I should have a chance to defend it by superior play due to defenders advantage, I should get behind after this, and ONLY in severe cases should I die.
A game, imo, should be won by gaining small advantages until you can break the opponent. It should not be that you gain one advantage and after that its over.
Defenders advantage in sc2 is simply to weak, especially due to maps being small and bases so hard to defend.
Also there's so many things that can be done that you will have very hard time defending. For some things you need to be able to shoot air, which is harder to do in sc2 (at least for zerg). For other things you need detection, which is harder for all races except terran.
I have nothing against this... except that it's a lot harder to scout and you get more punished by doing the wrong tactic. If sc1 was a Rock papper scissors best of 51, then sc2 is rock papper scissors best of 3.
Try making 2 lings to kill the scout to end up with 6 roaches instead of 7. You'll still have the advantage. Point is, pooling first opens more options for Zerg players to deal with marine/SCV rushes then going hatchery first. You don't have to go 7RR. You could make 3 spine crawlers instead. However, you for some reason, feel that the game must be an automatic Zerg win for some reason.
As Spiffy already argued my point, I won't repeat that as much. But I'm done arguing with you after the third time you've told me of my sense of entitlement after the the third time I've told you it has nothing to do with greed, but actual better defensive options. It makes me think I'm getting trolled.
I think the 2 rax pressure MIGHT be too strong not because of marines or scvs but because of sink/lift supply depots.
the T can do a variety of 2 rax pressure builds(start with 2 rax and go to 4, or expand/tech behind it) all while the other player is in the dark scouting wise. If depots couldnt sink, then after faking pressure or prodding with marine scv, the T would need to lift a rax to get back in, a timing where a scout could slip in.
There is no way of knowing what type of pressure they will express and hence the fear of the allin results in not knowing whats coming. If the Z commits to being extra safe, makes lots of lings from both hatches, the T can simply stop the pressure and sit behind their wallin while their expo finishes and they double produce scv/mule until they can get bunkers up at the nat. Those lings are now useless and the Z is now behind income wise without the T committing to anything. So the Z has to defend with the exact amount of units so they can drone up to NOT be behind in econ. This defense while beautiful when executed properly is easy to mess up.
Without sink/lift depots, if the Z plays it safe and the scv marine pressure is thwarted, the T would either choose to lose their pressuring army or retreat with it and the lings can runby the rax lifting off, scouting the T.
The T leaving their base in the early game I feel should have some form of commitment. If a protoss player 3 gate expands, while poke and prodding with stalker sentry pressure. The Z can overreact, mass speedlings and kill a good portion of that army and apply pressure.
So I would say the only nerf/buff required for the early game is to make sink/lift depot come at a later time in the game. And at the same time, a few buff tweaks to terran late game would benefit as well.
On December 13 2010 02:12 VenerableSpace wrote: I think the 2 rax pressure MIGHT be too strong not because of marines or scvs but because of sink/lift supply depots.
the T can do a variety of 2 rax pressure builds(start with 2 rax and go to 4, or expand/tech behind it) all while the other player is in the dark scouting wise. If depots couldnt sink, then after faking pressure or prodding with marine scv, the T would need to lift a rax to get back in, a timing where a scout could slip in.
There is no way of knowing what type of pressure they will express and hence the fear of the allin results in not knowing whats coming. If the Z commits to being extra safe, makes lots of lings from both hatches, the T can simply stop the pressure and sit behind their wallin while their expo finishes and they double produce scv/mule until they can get bunkers up at the nat. Those lings are now useless and the Z is now behind income wise without the T committing to anything. So the Z has to defend with the exact amount of units so they can drone up to NOT be behind in econ. This defense while beautiful when executed properly is easy to mess up.
Without sink/lift depots, if the Z plays it safe and the scv marine pressure is thwarted, the T would either choose to lose their pressuring army or retreat with it and the lings can runby the rax lifting off, scouting the T.
The T leaving their base in the early game I feel should have some form of commitment. If a protoss player 3 gate expands, while poke and prodding with stalker sentry pressure. The Z can overreact, mass speedlings and kill a good portion of that army and apply pressure.
So I would say the only nerf/buff required for the early game is to make sink/lift depot come at a later time in the game. And at the same time, a few buff tweaks to terran late game would benefit as well.
uh... Terrans have been using the rax as the door for 10 years now, I don't think it's going to be a problem.
EPT
