|
On April 19 2011 21:22 hugman wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2011 20:58 Severedevil wrote:Spine Crawlers, Infestors, and Broodlords all have superior range to the Lurker. Do any of those units hold off aggressive low-tech midgame pushes?
Yes.
On April 19 2011 21:24 partysnatcher wrote:
1) Zerg is more difficult to just play "normally" - this is a fact, and few people will deny this.
2) When SC2 was refined to require less APM, a lot of fast, skilled players looked towards Z because they thought they would get more out of their fast fingers with Zerg.
3) Most people I know that were high level in other games, now play Zerg. Ie - better, higher quality RTS players have picked Zerg.
4) It is a common experience for Zergs on ladder to play harder, sneakier and more tactical than their opponents, and lose to simple, mindless, cookie-cutter builds by P and T.
5) Most intelligent commentators and people with insight in SC2, are Zerg players.
We have some awesome Ts and Ps out there, by all means, but most Zergs are playing on "very hard"-mode. Zergs have tried to master the game on "very hard" mode for almost a year now, and are of course in the face of repeated defeat, much better trained than most Ts and Ps.
Based on player skill alone, Zerg should be the dominating race as it was in the early / mid beta.
1. No it's not. It's a delusion of grandeur coming from zerg players.
2. I'd argue Terran requires the highest APM at the absolute top level.
3. Pointless and subjective. Nada and Boxer play Terran, MC plays Protoss. Doesn't mean a single thing.
4. Also untrue. In fact, the most common thing for zergs to do on ladder is just to pump out drones and have no units and thus die to an attack (or baneling bust).
5. What the hell is this, is this an actual argument?
Your entire post is so biased that it's actually disgusting.
|
In zerg late game, when you've got all that creep spread so nicely and toss is hunkered down in its own base, and Z is entirely maxed at 200/200 with 80 some drones, I don't understand the lack of spine crawlers. I mean why just suicide your units at them, why not turn 20 of your drones into moveable defense and free up additional supply for army count?
I mean think about it right, you already have creep everywhere, they are more cost effective than any unit in the game, and they free up supply!
If you combine them with spore crawlers I don't know how a toss ball breaks that position without losing too many units of their own. In the first game where Idra played crunch, amongst other things, Idra could've done this, he could've thrown down spine crawlers with all the extra minerals he had. And it would'nt have been hard mixing in spore crawlers to deal with the void rays.
Remember, you don't have to kill toss, just wear it down. If they get caught up in a back and forth battle they lose because their base gets mined out...
We are all asking the wrong question if its how does Zerg burn through the ball, the question we should be asking is how can Zerg trade units at an efficient clip.
|
On April 20 2011 04:34 jhsu98 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2011 01:54 TheResidentEvil wrote:
protoss use their strongest units and zerg dont. Pretty easy to see how this got one sided. I mean people complain about the Void Ray/ Colo and its the Toss STRONGEST units. The issue here is that protoss can turtle while they slowly amass their "best units" while zerg couldn't do that. Try rushing to broodlord/infestor on 2-3 bases as zerg and see what happens. It's the scaling as you build your armies, zerg has to react to the potential of a 3-4 gate pressure, then 5-6 gate pressure, then air harass, dt tech so we're building our lower tier units and what happens? the protoss can either "shark mode" as inControl puts it or even just sit and turtle. Zerg options? Keep the units and try to engage eventually with them while teching/expanding or throw the units at the protoss via harassment. But it's so easy for the protoss to defend while taking minimal losses. Every unit the protoss gets along the way (sentries, then stalkers/void ray/colossus in any order) contributes immediately to their army AND adds to their deathball.
this is borderline theorycrafting. I can make up stuff too. Zerg can baneling bust, 6 pool, roach rush, nydus all kinds of stuff. Don't say every unit the protoss has and say you have to worry about them. Every unit you kill as zerg takes away from the toss death ball.
|
On April 20 2011 05:23 Dalavita wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2011 21:22 hugman wrote:On April 19 2011 20:58 Severedevil wrote:Spine Crawlers, Infestors, and Broodlords all have superior range to the Lurker. Do any of those units hold off aggressive low-tech midgame pushes? Yes. Show nested quote +On April 19 2011 21:24 partysnatcher wrote:
1) Zerg is more difficult to just play "normally" - this is a fact, and few people will deny this.
2) When SC2 was refined to require less APM, a lot of fast, skilled players looked towards Z because they thought they would get more out of their fast fingers with Zerg.
3) Most people I know that were high level in other games, now play Zerg. Ie - better, higher quality RTS players have picked Zerg.
4) It is a common experience for Zergs on ladder to play harder, sneakier and more tactical than their opponents, and lose to simple, mindless, cookie-cutter builds by P and T.
5) Most intelligent commentators and people with insight in SC2, are Zerg players.
We have some awesome Ts and Ps out there, by all means, but most Zergs are playing on "very hard"-mode. Zergs have tried to master the game on "very hard" mode for almost a year now, and are of course in the face of repeated defeat, much better trained than most Ts and Ps.
Based on player skill alone, Zerg should be the dominating race as it was in the early / mid beta. 1. No it's not. It's a delusion of grandeur coming from zerg players. 2. I'd argue Terran requires the highest APM at the absolute top level. 3. Pointless and subjective. Nada and Boxer play Terran, MC plays Protoss. Doesn't mean a single thing. 4. Also untrue. In fact, the most common thing for zergs to do on ladder is just to pump out drones and have no units and thus die to an attack (or baneling bust). 5. What the hell is this, is this an actual argument? Your entire post is so biased that it's actually disgusting.
Indeed it is....and point 5 is the most hilarious one
|
On April 20 2011 05:23 Dalavita wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2011 21:22 hugman wrote:On April 19 2011 20:58 Severedevil wrote:Spine Crawlers, Infestors, and Broodlords all have superior range to the Lurker. Do any of those units hold off aggressive low-tech midgame pushes? Yes. Show nested quote +On April 19 2011 21:24 partysnatcher wrote:
1) Zerg is more difficult to just play "normally" - this is a fact, and few people will deny this.
2) When SC2 was refined to require less APM, a lot of fast, skilled players looked towards Z because they thought they would get more out of their fast fingers with Zerg.
3) Most people I know that were high level in other games, now play Zerg. Ie - better, higher quality RTS players have picked Zerg.
4) It is a common experience for Zergs on ladder to play harder, sneakier and more tactical than their opponents, and lose to simple, mindless, cookie-cutter builds by P and T.
5) Most intelligent commentators and people with insight in SC2, are Zerg players.
We have some awesome Ts and Ps out there, by all means, but most Zergs are playing on "very hard"-mode. Zergs have tried to master the game on "very hard" mode for almost a year now, and are of course in the face of repeated defeat, much better trained than most Ts and Ps.
Based on player skill alone, Zerg should be the dominating race as it was in the early / mid beta. 1. No it's not. It's a delusion of grandeur coming from zerg players. 2. I'd argue Terran requires the highest APM at the absolute top level. 3. Pointless and subjective. Nada and Boxer play Terran, MC plays Protoss. Doesn't mean a single thing. 4. Also untrue. In fact, the most common thing for zergs to do on ladder is just to pump out drones and have no units and thus die to an attack (or baneling bust). 5. What the hell is this, is this an actual argument? Your entire post is so biased that it's actually disgusting.
4. Maybe cause it is much harder for the zerg to choose inbetween workers and units  ?
|
On April 20 2011 05:40 TheResidentEvil wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2011 04:34 jhsu98 wrote:On April 20 2011 01:54 TheResidentEvil wrote:
protoss use their strongest units and zerg dont. Pretty easy to see how this got one sided. I mean people complain about the Void Ray/ Colo and its the Toss STRONGEST units. The issue here is that protoss can turtle while they slowly amass their "best units" while zerg couldn't do that. Try rushing to broodlord/infestor on 2-3 bases as zerg and see what happens. It's the scaling as you build your armies, zerg has to react to the potential of a 3-4 gate pressure, then 5-6 gate pressure, then air harass, dt tech so we're building our lower tier units and what happens? the protoss can either "shark mode" as inControl puts it or even just sit and turtle. Zerg options? Keep the units and try to engage eventually with them while teching/expanding or throw the units at the protoss via harassment. But it's so easy for the protoss to defend while taking minimal losses. Every unit the protoss gets along the way (sentries, then stalkers/void ray/colossus in any order) contributes immediately to their army AND adds to their deathball. this is borderline theorycrafting. I can make up stuff too. Zerg can baneling bust, 6 pool, roach rush, nydus all kinds of stuff. Don't say every unit the protoss has and say you have to worry about them. Every unit you kill as zerg takes away from the toss death ball.
That is absolutely not theorycrafting, it's what happens every single game. Zerg have shitty scouting and CANNOT attack a Protoss who has a few sentries up unless they invest a huge amount of money into drops and a bunch of suicidal overlords to do the dropping, which makes the attack somewhat of an all-in. Force fields and choke points are actually kinda good. Yeah you can nydus into his base, but that relies on the Protoss not bothering to get vision of those dark corners, which anyone competent will do.
This massive defensive advantage allows the Protoss to turtle on 3 base and make whatever the fuck army he wants, because he has infinity time to make it. Zerg, on the other hand, have absolutely no defender's advantage thanks to proxy pylons, and since their scouting is terrible they need to be constantly ready for an attack that may never arrive. How many times has a Zerg player lost to a Protoss attack because he made nothing but drones? A shitton. And every time we see that people say "omg playing idra style make nothing but drones so greedy noob". How many times does a Protoss flat-out lose to an attack that wasn't even all-in? Pretty much never. As soon as that first sentry pops there is no way for Zerg to attack. Ultralisks and broodlords, the high tier Zerg units that we're apparently supposed to rush to, cost ridiculous amounts of money and take about 10 minutes to get out even if they were free. Infestors are cheaper and faster to get out, but you simply can't have sufficient infestors out fast enough to defend against any timing attacks, and if you try to tech to them fast rather than making a ton of roach/hydra you will flat out die to a thousand different builds. Zerg simply cannot go straight for a deathball.
|
deleted cuz i dont want to debate any more
|
On April 20 2011 06:12 TheMenace wrote:4. Maybe cause it is much harder for the zerg to choose inbetween workers and units ?
On close position metalopolis maybe, on any other map you have plenty of time.
|
On April 19 2011 21:24 partysnatcher wrote:
We have some awesome Ts and Ps out there, by all means, but most Zergs are playing on "very hard"-mode. Zergs have tried to master the game on "very hard" mode for almost a year now, and are of course in the face of repeated defeat, much better trained than most Ts and Ps.
Based on player skill alone, Zerg should be the dominating race as it was in the early / mid beta.
I generally agree with this, although I don't think beta zerg was good - It still had a lack of micro, and less units and special abilities than the other 2 races— it just won more games.
You reminded me of another point though. As far as I know, it's very hard or impossible to beat an insane AI terran or protoss as a zerg player (aside from very high micro with a 7 pool), while it's quite easy to win 1 vs 2 insane AI zergs as a terran or protoss.
On April 20 2011 06:39 Dalavita wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2011 06:12 TheMenace wrote:4. Maybe cause it is much harder for the zerg to choose inbetween workers and units ? On close position metalopolis maybe, on any other map you have plenty of time. Also slag pits and shattered temple
|
On April 20 2011 05:35 willyallthewei wrote:
In zerg late game, when you've got all that creep spread so nicely and toss is hunkered down in its own base, and Z is entirely maxed at 200/200 with 80 some drones, I don't understand the lack of spine crawlers. I mean why just suicide your units at them, why not turn 20 of your drones into moveable defense and free up additional supply for army count? because it costs 100 more minerals.
Combine that with the fact that spine/spore crawlers get outranged by colossus and siege tanks, and it becomes a somewhat wasted 100 minerals. It doesn't really help much at all if they have those units.
|
On April 20 2011 07:52 Xapti wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2011 05:35 willyallthewei wrote:
In zerg late game, when you've got all that creep spread so nicely and toss is hunkered down in its own base, and Z is entirely maxed at 200/200 with 80 some drones, I don't understand the lack of spine crawlers. I mean why just suicide your units at them, why not turn 20 of your drones into moveable defense and free up additional supply for army count? because it costs 100 more minerals. Combine that with the fact that spine/spore crawlers get outranged by colossus and siege tanks, and it becomes a somewhat wasted 100 minerals. It doesn't really help much at all if they have those units.
But you're already maxed and this frees up supply without wasting units.
And most importantly, you can now safely retreat when you see the battle is not in your favor and Toss cannot walk right to your main base and kill you, this slows them down considerably while you build up more units.
Think about it this way, does Terran stop building bunkers when Colossus come on the field?
Then why shouldn't this strategy be employed.
|
On April 20 2011 07:43 Xapti wrote:
You reminded me of another point though. As far as I know, it's very hard or impossible to beat an insane AI terran or protoss as a zerg player (aside from very high micro with a 7 pool)
Don't buy that you can't beat an insane AI 1v1 as zerg if you use infestors and banelings.
|
Most of the guy saying anything here are just clueless about zerg's point of view in ZvP, you just have no clue at all.
I should just summit my own replay, the replay of a lonely nooby 3k5 master zerg that TRY, because I try, we try, we ALL TRY as zerg players. Most of you just don't watch IdrA's stream: there are infestors everywhere, broodlord reached a lot, he switch tech a lot, ling bling / burrowed roach / roach hydra / ling roach, he tries everything. It is like the protoss community is here saying you just suck just make "nydus" and "infestOrZ".
Myself, at my own level, I make a lot of infestor, my most recent ZvP style is some kind of modified aquanda's style: I start with a fast 3rd and ling bling upgraded, then I had roach, hydra and I try to harass while teching to infestor / corruptors / upgrades / T3 into ultras. I use almost all my units (except mutas for some reasons), I tech switch a lot. We all try, we all use all our units.
The freaking death ball is and has NEVER been the problem in ZvP : the guy talking about that are just clueless about the match up / are not good enough. The deathball is just very very cost effective, but the death ball can be countered with the right unit mix / the right economy / the right tech.
But here is the problem about zerg, and the problem in ZvP in my opinion.
Zerg are weak to scout until overlord speed, so we can just guess and act on the guess that we have AND the zerg have NO DEFENSIVE UNIT. There is no, NOT ONE, unit that help zerg defend cost efficiently. The lurker is no more, so the only way to defend is to OUTMUSCLE your opponent: you need to build a shitload of unit.
In fact, the best way to understand is to watch ZvZ: in ZvZ, the moment you tech to infestor is actually a weird moment because you're weak for a short moment, because making the infestor pit, upgrading the infestors, mean more or less 4-5 less roach than your opponent and THAT IS BIG in a match were it is most likely roach vs roach for a bunch of time. So the only way is to delay infestorz, almost nobody just rush to infestor after having like 10-15 "safe" roach. No the "safe roach" spot is more likely around 30.
That's why so many Zerg just stay in Lair for so long: because we all had this experience trying to tech and getting just roflcrushed by a useless 6 gate / 4 gate or any 3 rax pressure. It's a game with no defensive advantage, were zerg have lost their only mid game strong cost efficient defensive unit. Protoss have sentries, Terran have tank and MMM that are still very cost effective, we have none of that.
Even the last most "original" play, like mondragon or spanishiwa, are all MADE to compensate that weakness: spanishiwa just mass spine and queen so that he can tech up without having to make a shitload of roach/hydra or ling/baneling and keep all his gaz to tech, but to do that he just cripple his agressive capacities early game (and in my opinion it's a shitty "style" that should not work because you just let go any kind of early agression). Mondragon on the other side just counter that by being very agressive with the most cost efficient unit the zerg have: the roach (you know, if you don't want to defend, just play agressive). But zerg is also shitty to play agressive: we have no units with high range high speed that are great to harass (we have one high range and slow, one fast and low range).
I will even say something maybe a bit harsh: the current protoss community is pretty weak and just dont understand shit about ZvP. They feel more or less "ok" with the current death ball that they just don't see the zerg weakness and don't abuse it. MC understood since some times now, and just roflstomp every zerg he sees.
So to sums up: we can tech to infestors every game, but by doing that, we will just get crushed one game every 3 game by a noob that just come at our door at the right time. The only and most efficient way to play ZvP is still to stay on roach / ling bling / hydra roach for a while just to defend or play agressive while teching.
|
Spanishiwa has been demolishing protoss with bane speeldings drops in expo's mineral line before they get more than 2 colossus, and then getting ultras, queens, bane, ling, infestor. Poor protoss "deathball" lol. It's really no match for that composition. The use of nydus just shows that even though it costs 100 gas more than a pylon, it's also much better. You're not limited to the number of gates to warp in units, and they can be sent back home. Toss units warped in as harass, are generally there to die. He even uses it just to transfer drones to far off bases lol. He abuses the mobility of zerglings with upgraded attack, either massing them or dropping on top of colossi / sentries, totally nullifying forcefields and the range of the colossus. Colossus are only good because of their 9 range and splash with clumped units. Dropping attack upgraded zerglings on top of colossus (or some times ultras O_o) is a very sad thing to see. It's by far a more cost-effective counter than corruptors.
I think a lot of zerg players are not abusing many of the good qualities of the race. Be it nydus, mobility, mass transfuse, fast tech switches. I see zerg players using their armies like they were P or T. engaging in small chokes, not flanking, not coming from behind, not making archs, not abusing their higher mobility and attacking from various sides at the same time and then just retreat when the big slow ball army arrives to defend. They just make a full frontal attack. True, it's not as easy, and probably that's one of the reasons we don't see it yet, but it's guaranteed to be more effective. As you should know, the more mobile a unit is, the weaker its strength, and i don't see players using that mobility, they watch a 200 vs 200 a mobile army vs a slower one and get surprised that the slower one wins, then complain about imbalance. Ridiculous.
If i had to bet, the next nerf would be on Z vs P.
|
On April 20 2011 06:15 Ezekyle wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2011 05:40 TheResidentEvil wrote:On April 20 2011 04:34 jhsu98 wrote:On April 20 2011 01:54 TheResidentEvil wrote:
protoss use their strongest units and zerg dont. Pretty easy to see how this got one sided. I mean people complain about the Void Ray/ Colo and its the Toss STRONGEST units. The issue here is that protoss can turtle while they slowly amass their "best units" while zerg couldn't do that. Try rushing to broodlord/infestor on 2-3 bases as zerg and see what happens. It's the scaling as you build your armies, zerg has to react to the potential of a 3-4 gate pressure, then 5-6 gate pressure, then air harass, dt tech so we're building our lower tier units and what happens? the protoss can either "shark mode" as inControl puts it or even just sit and turtle. Zerg options? Keep the units and try to engage eventually with them while teching/expanding or throw the units at the protoss via harassment. But it's so easy for the protoss to defend while taking minimal losses. Every unit the protoss gets along the way (sentries, then stalkers/void ray/colossus in any order) contributes immediately to their army AND adds to their deathball. this is borderline theorycrafting. I can make up stuff too. Zerg can baneling bust, 6 pool, roach rush, nydus all kinds of stuff. Don't say every unit the protoss has and say you have to worry about them. Every unit you kill as zerg takes away from the toss death ball. That is absolutely not theorycrafting, it's what happens every single game. Zerg have shitty scouting
Zerg have the fastest, cheapest ground unit in the game, which can turn invisible while stationary. This provides a shitload of scouting. Zerg have the cheapest flying unit in the game. This provides a shitload of scouting.
You, not the Zerg, are holding you back.
On April 20 2011 08:12 WhiteDog wrote:
But here is the problem about zerg, and the problem in ZvP in my opinion.
Zerg are weak to scout until overlord speed, so we can just guess and act on the guess that we have AND the zerg have NO DEFENSIVE UNIT. There is no, NOT ONE, unit that help zerg defend cost efficiently. The lurker is no more, so the only way to defend is to OUTMUSCLE your opponent: you need to build a shitload of unit.
Queens and Spines are efficient defensive units, available very early in the game.
|
On April 20 2011 08:12 WhiteDog wrote:
Even the last "original" play, like mondragon or spanishiwa, are all MADE to compensate that weakness: spanishiwa just mass spine and queen so that he can tech up without having to make a shitload of roach/hydra or ling/baneling and keep all his gaz to tech, but to do that he just cripple his agressive capacities early game (and in my opinion it's a shitty "style" that should not work). Mondragon on the other side just counter that by being very agressive with the most cost efficient unit the zerg have: the roach (you know, if you don't want to defend, just play agressive). But zerg is also shitty to play agressive: we have no units with high range high speed that are great to harass (we have one high range and slow, one fast and low range).
That's the right attitude by dismissing other styles and saying shit is broken and needs to be patched.
Maybe that's the reason zergs aren't really doing progress.
Players that are pursuing their own ZvP style (spanishiwa / mondragon / sheth) seem to do quite well in that matchup.
|
On April 20 2011 08:20 Apolo wrote:
[...]
I think a lot of zerg players are not abusing many of the good qualities of the race. Be it nydus, mobility, mass transfuse, fast tech switches. I see zerg players using their armies like they were P or T. engaging in small chokes, not flanking, not coming from behind, not making archs, not abusing their higher mobility and attacking from various sides at the same time and then just retreat when the big slow ball army arrives to defend. They just make a full frontal attack. True, it's not as easy, and probably that's one of the reasons we don't see it yet, but it's guaranteed to be more effective. As you should know, the more mobile a unit is, the weaker its strength, and i don't see players using that mobility, they watch a 200 vs 200 a mobile army vs a slower one and get surprised that the slower one wins, then complain about imbalance. Ridiculous.
[...]
really like this post - i fully agree
|
On April 20 2011 05:23 Dalavita wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2011 21:22 hugman wrote:On April 19 2011 20:58 Severedevil wrote:Spine Crawlers, Infestors, and Broodlords all have superior range to the Lurker. Do any of those units hold off aggressive low-tech midgame pushes? Yes. Show nested quote +On April 19 2011 21:24 partysnatcher wrote:
1) Zerg is more difficult to just play "normally" - this is a fact, and few people will deny this.
2) When SC2 was refined to require less APM, a lot of fast, skilled players looked towards Z because they thought they would get more out of their fast fingers with Zerg.
3) Most people I know that were high level in other games, now play Zerg. Ie - better, higher quality RTS players have picked Zerg.
4) It is a common experience for Zergs on ladder to play harder, sneakier and more tactical than their opponents, and lose to simple, mindless, cookie-cutter builds by P and T.
5) Most intelligent commentators and people with insight in SC2, are Zerg players.
We have some awesome Ts and Ps out there, by all means, but most Zergs are playing on "very hard"-mode. Zergs have tried to master the game on "very hard" mode for almost a year now, and are of course in the face of repeated defeat, much better trained than most Ts and Ps.
Based on player skill alone, Zerg should be the dominating race as it was in the early / mid beta. 1. No it's not. It's a delusion of grandeur coming from zerg players. 2. I'd argue Terran requires the highest APM at the absolute top level. 3. Pointless and subjective. Nada and Boxer play Terran, MC plays Protoss. Doesn't mean a single thing. 4. Also untrue. In fact, the most common thing for zergs to do on ladder is just to pump out drones and have no units and thus die to an attack (or baneling bust). 5. What the hell is this, is this an actual argument? Your entire post is so biased that it's actually disgusting.
I made that post extra provoking to get some responses.
My background is I've played RTS for many years, including on pro level. For years, replays, mainly WC3 and SC:BW, was my main sparetime entertainment, and I estimate I've seen about 1500-2000 pro replays in my time. In other words, I have sufficient metacognition about RTSing to know the dynamics, estimate risks / potential / effort / concentration involved in RTS exchanges.
In your post here, you seem to be mixing two concepts:
1) Zergs "required skill", where Zergs always need an extra layer of multitasking for expanding, queens and larvae, on top of everything else they want to do. Also, the tiny margin of error which requires perfectionism in every attack.
2) Terran (and Protoss') "opportunity skill", where the micro and harassment has a refinement potential (stim / kite / blink / forcefield / drops / etc) that does not exist for Zerg.
To illustrate, Zergs improvement over time curve is slow at the beginning, then rises fast, until the curve flattens out where Protoss and Terrans curves continue rising due to having more opportunities for refinement.
Delusions of grandeur - where would Zerg players get that from? Hardly winning any tournaments? Being beaten by simple build orders? You argue that Zergs often lose to over- or underdroning - that's how the game goes when you are forced to play to someone else's tune.
I am not saying that players like MarineKingPrime, MVP or oGsMC are bad. They are very, very impressive players. But they have opportunities that their Zerg opponents do not, and they have a lot more attention available in their games, than their Zerg opponents do. Creative, high-level micro Zerg players like Fruitdealer, face defeat after defeat that they don't deserve, against inferior players.
The fact is, for each day P / T's deny that Zerg underpowered state remains a problem, Starcraft 2's potential is losing momentum, by tournaments being 2-race mirrorfests, and by players not being rewarded for their actual skill in terms of wins.
|
On April 20 2011 08:12 WhiteDog wrote:
Most of the guy saying anything here are just clueless about zerg's point of view in ZvP, you just have no clue at all.
I should just summit my own replay, the replay of a lonely nooby 3k5 master zerg that TRY, because I try, we try, we ALL TRY as zerg players. Most of you just don't watch IdrA's stream: there are infestors everywhere, broodlord reached a lot, he switch tech a lot, ling bling / burrowed roach / roach hydra / ling roach, he tries everything. It is like the protoss community is here saying you just suck just make "nydus" and "infestOrZ".
Myself, at my own level, I make a lot of infestor, my most recent ZvP style is some kind of modified aquanda's style: I start with a fast 3rd and ling bling upgraded, then I had roach, hydra and I try to harass while teching to infestor / corruptors / upgrades / T3 into ultras. I use almost all my units (except mutas for some reasons), I tech switch a lot. We all try, we all use all our units.
The freaking death ball is and has NEVER been the problem in ZvP : the guy talking about that are just clueless about the match up / are not good enough. The deathball is just very very cost effective, but the death ball can be countered with the right unit mix / the right economy / the right tech.
But here is the problem about zerg, and the problem in ZvP in my opinion.
Zerg are weak to scout until overlord speed, so we can just guess and act on the guess that we have AND the zerg have NO DEFENSIVE UNIT. There is no, NOT ONE, unit that help zerg defend cost efficiently. The lurker is no more, so the only way to defend is to OUTMUSCLE your opponent: you need to build a shitload of unit.
In fact, the best way to understand is to watch ZvZ: in ZvZ, the moment you tech to infestor is actually a weird moment because you're weak for a short moment, because making the infestor pit, upgrading the infestors, mean more or less 4-5 less roach than your opponent and THAT IS BIG in a match were it is most likely roach vs roach for a bunch of time. So the only way is to delay infestorz, almost nobody just rush to infestor after having like 10-15 "safe" roach. No the "safe roach" spot is more likely around 30.
That's why so many Zerg just stay in Lair for so long: because we all had this experience trying to tech and getting just roflcrushed by a useless 6 gate / 4 gate or any 3 rax pressure. It's a game with no defensive advantage, were zerg have lost their only mid game strong cost efficient defensive unit. Protoss have sentries, Terran have tank and MMM that are still very cost effective, we have none of that.
Even the last "original" play, like mondragon or spanishiwa, are all MADE to compensate that weakness: spanishiwa just mass spine and queen so that he can tech up without having to make a shitload of roach/hydra or ling/baneling and keep all his gaz to tech, but to do that he just cripple his agressive capacities early game (and in my opinion it's a shitty "style" that should not work). Mondragon on the other side just counter that by being very agressive with the most cost efficient unit the zerg have: the roach (you know, if you don't want to defend, just play agressive). But zerg is also shitty to play agressive: we have no units with high range high speed that are great to harass (we have one high range and slow, one fast and low range).
I will even say something maybe a bit harsh: the current protoss community is pretty weak and just dont understand shit about ZvP. They feel more or less "ok" with the current death ball that they just don't see the zerg weakness and don't abuse it. MC understood since some times now, and just roflstomp every zerg he sees.
So to sums up: we can tech to infestors every game, but by doing that, we will just get crushed one game every 3 game by a noob that just come at our door at the right time. The only and most efficient way to play ZvP is still to stay on roach / ling bling / hydra roach for a while just to defend or play agressive while teching.
Pretty much.
|
^ 2) Opportunity skill is there for Z.
Baneling drops, fungal drops, Burrow micro (much like blink), NP, multiprong fighting (were the BEST at pushing multiple areas at once, given how durable/good roaches are, and all the tools we have early)
Not to mention contaminate, nydus worms, burrowed banelings.
Theres opportunity for micro, just maybe not int he terms YOU see it (blink, ff, stim)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
