EPTLack of attacking ability for zerg - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Boxxer
83 Posts
| ||
|
MrCon
France29748 Posts
The amusing thing is : if you 1 rax, the zerg will not make units, and so he'll have the same very hard time to defend your early 5 marines "push" than he'll have to defend a 2 raxes. | ||
|
lagbzz
Poland171 Posts
| ||
|
darkscream
Canada2310 Posts
Your job, as zerg, is to fast expand without dying, and then outproduce and outexpand your opponent. If you are really good you also put feelers everywhere on the map so you know exactly what your opponent is doing. Then you just constantly reproduce whatever you lose. The hard part is the very first thing, fast expand without dying. There are just so many different flavours of early aggression and no way to scout them reliably. 1 rax with a bunker at the front could mean 2rax all in or a banshee rush, and there's no way to find out early enough without attacking and losing some potential economy, or throwing away an overlord. So if it's a close position map and you can't 14 hatch, you're gonna have to pull some 1base shenanigans in order to expand early. Balanced or not, that's how it is. It frustates me a lot sometimes and it seems like I have no easy answer to their easy attack, which is basically a guaranteed advantage vs fast expand, unless they horribly horribly fail. | ||
|
Igaryu85
Germany195 Posts
If you ask me it is cool that zerg are probably not designed for serious early agression except for all ins. Because you can play the defensive Swarm and if someone stirrs your calm you can attack him like an angry bee swarm and crush them all;) | ||
|
Boxxer
83 Posts
On December 24 2010 18:38 darkscream wrote: Zerg has no early game options. You can win by surprising someone with a lame rush or hidden tech (a lame opponent who cant scout baneling bust), but anyone using their race fully is immune to zerg attacks. Your job, as zerg, is to fast expand without dying, and then outproduce and outexpand your opponent. If you are really good you also put feelers everywhere on the map so you know exactly what your opponent is doing. Then you just constantly reproduce whatever you lose. The hard part is the very first thing, fast expand without dying. There are just so many different flavours of early aggression and no way to scout them reliably. 1 rax with a bunker at the front could mean 2rax all in or a banshee rush, and there's no way to find out early enough without attacking and losing some potential economy, or throwing away an overlord. So if it's a close position map and you can't 14 hatch, you're gonna have to pull some 1base shenanigans in order to expand early. Balanced or not, that's how it is. It frustates me a lot sometimes and it seems like I have no easy answer to their easy attack, which is basically a guaranteed advantage vs fast expand, unless they horribly horribly fail. You just described how Zerg is supposed to be played, I don't understand why it sounds strange to you that Zerg work this way, your not supposed to get an easy ride to late game. QQ I'm a Zerg and I have the strongest late game but I also want the strongest early game as well  That's all Zerg sounds like in this thread TBH, I wish people would stop whining all the time and just play the damn game instead, if Zerg spent more time spreading the creep instead of spending all their time spreading the crap I'm sure they'll be a lot better at this game. | ||
|
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On December 24 2010 10:54 FlamingTurd wrote: Yea... leads back to the whole problem Z has of not doing enough damage per cost of unit. The stats all show increasingly lately Z is having problems, hopefully something will eventually be done about it. Sick of watching 80% tournaments won by T and the rest by P yepp like gsl 1 and 2 You fail to realise that if terran and protoss does not put pressure on the zerg, he can expand and A move your base while laughing at your economy. | ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
And in bw, yes zerg was aggressiv first with 9 pool etc, they throw out 6 lings and keep the terran contained in his base. That kinda changed as terrans moved out with a single vulture to snipe drones and lings. And even before as a terran you learned get your 2 medics maybe a firebat as well and then move to the zerg. And zerg had to put up sunkens in time or would instantly lose. Also you needed a few lings also. If you see sc2. A zerg doesn't even have to build lings, because he can have so many larva he can instantly produce an well sized army. The neglection of getting spines or roaches to early makes it easier for the other races to simply run over zergs, but even if their lings get destroyed by the opponents unit combo, they have good chances of staying in game. Thats something i dislike at the game atm, that a zerg is unpunished for a fe, even if you get spines you can use these later at your third to prevent harassment. I may be wrong on this one though. I liked at bw that you only needed to go out to your enemys base and he will build 2 sunkens and you did your damage and you can simply move back. Now i always have to fear that i will lose my marines on the retreat, because they are slow and weak to lings (even with micro). | ||
palookieblue
Australia326 Posts
On December 24 2010 12:37 majestouch wrote: blizzard put no thought into the zerg race and when zerg wins vs another race (besides zerg) its because the zerg player is inherently better there is no point making threads like this because they will go nowhere. -snip- a continuation of the the "starting from behind" with this being said, it is easier for terran/protoss to "checkmate" so to speak zerg, lets say a protoss opens 2 stargate phoenix (then expand) - with these they will pick off queens/overlords and force most likely hydras (Seeing corruptors are way too slow to catch them) then, now that the protoss controlled the zerg's tech path they are already tech switching to the protoss warpgate/colli deathball. edit: also, allins in sc2 are made way too powerful by warpgate/chronoboost/mules mules = around 5 workers warpgate = insta reinforcements chronoboost = allows insanely fast tech (4gate allins, blink stalker allin etc) when these are compared to larva inject, only during the late game does larva inject seem "op" due to zergs being able to "throw units" at the problem, however, by that time in the game the zerg was most likely not contained and given a free ticket to expand-land, which is only the terran/protosses fault ... Absolute garbage. You actually believe all this, especially the bolded? Mules and chronoboost are the respective abilities which allow T/P to keep up with the potential economy (note, potential) advantage of Z (drone production). It's very misleading when you take things out of context and use it to frame your argument. Other random things like... corruptors are slower than hydras? The funniest bit is you blame T/P for letting Z get to the late game (in your last sentence), yet you condemn early pressure/ all-ins. | ||
|
-orb-
United States5770 Posts
It seems you're looking at this only from zerg's perspective. Also it seems you're unfamiliar with the fact that zerglings are now faster than god and can counter attack extremely easily... On some large maps speedlings can counterattack, kill all workers at one base and then be back to defend the attack before any damage was done (if they move out at the same time) | ||
|
aughban
United Kingdom1 Post
| ||
|
BuuGhost
Netherlands340 Posts
| ||
|
decaf
Austria1797 Posts
What to do against it? - The bad solution: FE with a patroling drone at your choke, the better solution: doinf the opening JulyZerg does, 14gas 14 pool. You don't get your economy up that quickly but you at least stay in the game. I think there's more hope against terran, since banelings own marines pretty larvae efficiently and oyu can produce more drones. But I also think terran all-ins are way to powerful, you simply don't know when it's coming and SCVs are stronger than drones and marines are ranged, if it fails no prob, he got MULEs to push or to build up again. I also don't think that terran is at a disadvantage late game against Zerg. I think Jinro shuts all the naysayers up. Ever played metalopolis agianst a decent terran? - He cuts the map in half (late game meta favors terran) and steamrolls all your hatches while you cant basetrade against these fortified terran positions. | ||
|
Robinsa
Japan1333 Posts
| ||
|
Ghad
Norway2551 Posts
On December 24 2010 10:50 morimacil wrote: Marines and zealots force an investment of at least equal cost to defend, and thus it is near impossible to come out behind. Even if you lose 5 marines, and dont kill anything at all, that means the zerg had to invest at least 250 minerals into killing them, and his investment in army is now useless, since he cant actually attack you and hope to do any damage at all. If you beat an early attack that is your queue to start maintaining map control and hopefully expand, no?  | ||
|
Gigaudas
Sweden1213 Posts
On December 24 2010 11:05 Krejven wrote: Yeah I also get sick that Terran got 66,66% of the GSL wins while Zerg got 0%. oh wait.... http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/sc2-international/individual-leagues Because three individual games (the finals) out of thousands played on a top of level matters? Seriously, I don't feel the imbalance when I'm playing but it's so very, very obvious that choosing Terran gives you a huge advantage if you're going for a successful SC2-career while going Zerg is a huge disadvantage. Zerg hasn't won since October the 25th in the European and American tournaments monitored by Teamliquid. It blows my mind how anyone can call this game balanced or even worse - call Zerg OP. EDIT: And click the god damn link, look at the ******* statistics. Arguing with Terran players is like arguing with god damn creationists. I'm so frustrated, I don't see how people can focus on such a small sample as the GSL winners, I don't see how people can focus on their own experiences from playing the game because it's STUPID. Statistics don't lie - and these statistics are overwhelmingly clear. | ||
|
morimacil
France921 Posts
If you beat an early attack that is your queue to start maintaining map control and hopefully expand, no? Lots of posts like this saying "you can macro!" And indeed, we can. Im not saying zerg lacks the ability to macro, quite the opposite in fact. Its just that if for example, a terran plays against a protoss opponent, and wins an engagement, he then has the ability to use that advantage to attack, expand, or tech. Same thing for toss. For zerg however, its just expand or tech, at least until really late in the game. Im not asking for advice on how to play a macro game. Im asking if you think its fun to only have that option, if terrans and protoss think its fun to not have to worry about being attacked until they take their third, and if you think that in the long run, the games will be most exciting to watch when everyone knows what the zerg is going to try and do long in advance. | ||
|
Ghad
Norway2551 Posts
| ||
|
IdrA
United States11541 Posts
On December 24 2010 19:32 -orb- wrote: You could say literally the exact same thing about protoss or terran... It seems you're looking at this only from zerg's perspective. Also it seems you're unfamiliar with the fact that zerglings are now faster than god and can counter attack extremely easily... On some large maps speedlings can counterattack, kill all workers at one base and then be back to defend the attack before any damage was done (if they move out at the same time) or you can make a zealot and all those zerglings are now useless | ||
|
Zacsafus
England255 Posts
It is far from the truth that zerg cant counterattack, its just the current builds zergs are attempting to abuse aka. hatch first, cannot counter attack effectively but they do not really need to counter attack because they are already gaining an advantage in fast expanding, so in actual fact the pressure terran and protoss pile on is the only thing they can do to keep even as they cannot expand so fast and be so safe once zergs economy kicks in. | ||
| ||
