EPTThe Protoss deathball vs 2010 Zerg swarm - Page 17
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
epoc
Finland1190 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 47542
1484 Posts
On April 25 2011 16:57 Apolo wrote: Protoss deathball right? Wrong. More like zerg deathball. Even with all his units clumped up, zerg wins by a good margin. Zerg need to get something other than roach hydra and just a-moving on all games for once. Put on 20mins 10s to get to the ball vs ball. 10 collosus, very few support units, vs ultra/mindcontrol, and cracklings. Yeah I wonder why zerg won that battle. | ||
|
epoc
Finland1190 Posts
On April 25 2011 16:57 Apolo wrote: Protoss deathball right? Wrong. More like zerg deathball. Even with all his units clumped up, zerg wins by a good margin. Zerg need to get something other than roach hydra and just a-moving on all games for once. Put on 20mins 10s to get to the ball vs ball. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kztSU7gDItA&t=20m10s Three units counter ultras. Zealots, Immortals and Void rays. Colossus is not one of them. | ||
|
Aelfric
Turkey1496 Posts
On April 25 2011 17:26 epoc wrote: Three units counter ultras. Zealots, Immortals and Void rays. Colossus is not one of them. Yet if you make many zealots with immortalls continious fungals will eat them alive. Thats why Cruncher decided to go collosi instead. It is a fact that zerg needs to use infestors way more than they do right now. | ||
|
navara
France95 Posts
On April 25 2011 17:20 epoc wrote: All races are relatively easy to play. Zerg macro and droning decisions take some skill but the army micro is pretty nonexistant. :'( | ||
|
anycolourfloyd
Australia524 Posts
On April 25 2011 16:57 Apolo wrote: Protoss deathball right? Wrong. More like zerg deathball. Even with all his units clumped up, zerg wins by a good margin. Zerg need to get something other than roach hydra and just a-moving on all games for once. Put on 20mins 10s to get to the ball vs ball. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kztSU7gDItA&t=20m10s yeah you're right, we wouldn't want any sort of a contest for protoss being the lowest apm action requiring race. the problem is that zerg can't always make it to t3 and that "ball" could more accurately be described as "mass collossi just chilling in the open" | ||
|
DrBoo
Canada1177 Posts
Simply playing rather passive doing a bit of poking and harass with lings and mutas you can expand rather efficiently since you have much quicker units to get a decent map control. If you have a better economy then your opponent as zerg you can simply produce near endless amounts of zerglings and banlings. If you don't end up killing them before late game or if you notice they're amassing a large amount of colossi simply make some corruptors then morph them to broodlords and the banlings will keep the blink stalkers away. If they don't go as colossi heavy you can get ultras to crush forcefields as they'll most likely have more sentrys. | ||
|
ket-
97 Posts
To be honest, the only reason why there were (and still are) so many "how do i stop zerg" posts in these forums is because there are so many bronze/silver/gold players who have very little clue about the game and simply let the zerg do whatever he pleases. I'm not saying these leagues don't matter as they are players too and need to enjoy the game, but I still believe the game should be balanced around top level players are they obviously are the "end" product in that respect. Any player below that level (such as me) can fix his game by getting better, even though when some balance is broken he will still lose games he shouldn't have. Also, even though I'm zerg, I'm somehow not that worried about the deathball myself. Even when you watch top level players, you can still see quite a few mistakes in their game or details that aren't optimized. That doesn't really happen with BW anymore (well, not remotely as much) and - correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not the biggest BW expert out there - I've always been under the impression that players in BW have managed to find a perfect balance between "game" balance and "mechanics" (and/or micro) balance. I'm confident with time zergs will come up with builds that are safer while allowing for economic play and especially that with years (and HotS) people will learn new timings etc. The more I discover BW/SC2, the more I realise it's all about timings. Can't wait for HotS either way  | ||
|
MattyClutch
United States711 Posts
On April 25 2011 17:13 TheButtonmen wrote: It's been how long since release? Until there is a viable way to scout and some way to actually be cost effective when defending then yes I fully expect zergs to still be having problems with every none mirror match six months from now. Why? There is zero detail there. Yes Obs and H phoenixes are effective, but Zerg can scout with workers and scout with Overlords. I just do not see Zerg as being the hugely weakened race in scouting or in defending. I don't mean to disrespect, but this is coming from a very low level player (plat - diamond) who off races as Zerg and gets great benefit from overlords watching for drops. Sure you can do that with Observers, but those are robo time wasted whereas Overlords are a 'mobile pylon'. I am not saying you are wrong, but the post you made really dose not make the point you are going for to me. | ||
|
epoc
Finland1190 Posts
On April 25 2011 17:38 Aelfric wrote: Yet if you make many zealots with immortalls continious fungals will eat them alive. Thats why Cruncher decided to go collosi instead. It is a fact that zerg needs to use infestors way more than they do right now. Except Infestors still have 90 health. One fungal doesn't make them worth their cost. | ||
|
magha
Netherlands427 Posts
On April 25 2011 16:57 Apolo wrote: Protoss deathball right? Wrong. More like zerg deathball. Even with all his units clumped up, zerg wins by a good margin. Zerg need to get something other than roach hydra and just a-moving on all games for once. Put on 20mins 10s to get to the ball vs ball. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kztSU7gDItA&t=20m10s This topic mostly discusses the Voidray/Colossus/Gateway ball. The video you showed didnt include Void Rays. On April 25 2011 17:20 epoc wrote: All races are relatively easy to play. Zerg macro and droning decisions take some skill but the army micro is pretty nonexistant. Are you serious? Zerg require most micro of all races by far. Theyre the race which always loses when they attack move because of it. | ||
|
ALPINA
3791 Posts
On April 25 2011 16:57 Apolo wrote: Protoss deathball right? Wrong. More like zerg deathball. Even with all his units clumped up, zerg wins by a good margin. Zerg need to get something other than roach hydra and just a-moving on all games for once. Put on 20mins 10s to get to the ball vs ball. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kztSU7gDItA&t=20m10s Are you serious? It's 10 collosus vs. infestors with neural and ultras. I mean it's the worst toss composition vs. absolute counter from zerg. Did you even saw a real toss deathball? | ||
|
Baeksucho
France46 Posts
On April 25 2011 18:24 MattyClutch wrote: Why? There is zero detail there. Yes Obs and H phoenixes are effective, but Zerg can scout with workers and scout with Overlords. I just do not see Zerg as being the hugely weakened race in scouting or in defending. I don't mean to disrespect, but this is coming from a very low level player (plat - diamond) who off races as Zerg and gets great benefit from overlords watching for drops. Sure you can do that with Observers, but those are robo time wasted whereas Overlords are a 'mobile pylon'. I am not saying you are wrong, but the post you made really dose not make the point you are going for to me. he is talking about scouting early game, we don't have problem past t2 obviously, but in early game, as soon as the first marine comes out and kill your drone you are playing blind. (any decent player will kill your suicide overlord with 3 marines before you get any information) every terran's BO requires a different reaction (banshee /hellion /heavy marine for instance) same as protoss ( 4gate, forge FE ,stargate etc but it's easier since stalker doesn't come out too early ) to counter cost efficiently, you have to rely on them making mistakes ( like showing their factory, labo , starport etc near ramp ) | ||
|
TheButtonmen
Canada1403 Posts
On April 25 2011 18:24 MattyClutch wrote: Why? There is zero detail there. Yes Obs and H phoenixes are effective, but Zerg can scout with workers and scout with Overlords. I just do not see Zerg as being the hugely weakened race in scouting or in defending. I don't mean to disrespect, but this is coming from a very low level player (plat - diamond) who off races as Zerg and gets great benefit from overlords watching for drops. Sure you can do that with Observers, but those are robo time wasted whereas Overlords are a 'mobile pylon'. I am not saying you are wrong, but the post you made really dose not make the point you are going for to me. Overlords are terrible scouts as there is no way to get them past marines/stalkers vs a decent opponent until overlord speed finishs which means they are completely useless early game unless you rush lair and rushing lair means you just straight up lose to a lot of BO's. It's the same with zerglings, no amount of skill will get them passed a wall-off and since zerg has to respond wildly differently to the various P/T BO's there is always a gamble which you have to take when playing as zerg about exactly what they are going. Which leads to the second problem of the lack of cost effective defensive unit, zergs far more then the other races lack a strong defenders advantage and since you can't be sure what the opponent is going then you need to have defenses ready which means you need to put a fair bit of resources into producing potentially useless defences or accept the fact that even a much much worse players will just randomly take games off you by moving out at an odd time or right after you made a round of drones. | ||
|
Apolo
Portugal1259 Posts
The Protoss invested much more money in that ball than the Zerg. If something, as soon as Zerg reach or are close to reaching 200 they should attack because that's the time when they have similar amounts of money invested in their army. Unless you see 130-140 supply toss demolishing 200 supply zerg i don't see the problem. If you let Protoss reach 200 supply it's your fault as it's Protoss fault if they let the Zerg tech to mutas without even making spines, or blindly double expo, etc. Also, OP you might want to update the original post because the trend is actually shifting to terran domination again. | ||
|
Alphasquad
Austria505 Posts
On April 26 2011 03:25 Apolo wrote: There is also another point that many people seem to forget when comparing 200 supply clashes. The great majority of Protoss units cost more than Zerg's for their supply. How is not fair that 200 supply Protoss should be able to beat 200 supply Zerg? The Protoss invested much more money in that ball than the Zerg. If something, as soon as Zerg reach or are close to reaching 200 they should attack because that's the time when they have similar amounts of money invested in their army. Unless you see 130-140 supply toss demolishing 200 supply zerg i don't see the problem. If you let Protoss reach 200 supply it's your fault as it's Protoss fault if they let the Zerg tech to mutas without even making spines, or blindly double expo, etc. Also, OP you might want to update the original post because the trend is actually shifting to terran domination again. its true that the more resource heavy army wins but the margin is/was way too large as the zerg 200 supply army costs way more than the 40-50 supply that it kills - trading 120 supply for not even half of it is terrible lets take taldarim for example - how could zerg ever stop protoss before they get 200 supply?ofc im talking about protoss who know what they do | ||
|
archon256
United States363 Posts
| ||
|
Aequos
Canada606 Posts
On April 26 2011 04:14 Alphasquad wrote: its true that the more resource heavy army wins but the margin is/was way too large as the zerg 200 supply army costs way more than the 40-50 supply that it kills - trading 120 supply for not even half of it is terrible lets take taldarim for example - how could zerg ever stop protoss before they get 200 supply?ofc im talking about protoss who know what they do Notice, however, that sending 20 marines against a High Templar can result in the death of all 20 marines for no damage on the High Templar. Having 10 marines versus a deathball will inflict exactly 0 damage before they evaporate. Simply because Protoss outcosts (and hence "outnumbers") their Zerg opponents the damage inflicted by the deathball would increase drastically, making the outnumbering advantage accelerate. Is it fair? I think so, if only because Zerg's ability to power economy would make them unfairly good endgame if they could destroy the expensive deathball for cost. Actually, it would probably make them unfairly good mid game too. This is my opinion though, so don't cite it as evidence either way. | ||
|
Dragar
United Kingdom971 Posts
I think so, if only because Zerg's ability to power economy would make them unfairly good endgame if they could destroy the expensive deathball for cost. Midgame certainly, but lategame it's just not true. Protoss has just as much income as Zerg, and once the infrastructure has been placed, just as much production. | ||
|
Aequos
Canada606 Posts
On April 26 2011 10:25 Dragar wrote: Midgame certainly, but lategame it's just not true. Protoss has just as much income as Zerg, and once the infrastructure has been placed, just as much production. The reason it worries me endgame is that the Zerg has the equivalent of (up to) 19 concurrent gateways or robotics facilities or stargates per base (this does decrease once used). Imagine that, for example, 2 waves of Roach/Hydra could completely wipe out a deathball. (I believe the deathball is about 1.5-1.75x the cost of a Roach/Hydra army). This would leave a small residual for the Zerg, which must be dealt with by Protoss. So far it seems ok. However, Protoss only has the choice to remake an army with the production facilities he has. So if his first army was Colossus/VR/Stalker (a la Cruncher) his second army can really only be based on Colossus/Stargate/Gateway in the same proportions. I realize thats a bit hard to follow, so I'll try and explain it here in a different way. Protoss flat-up dies if forced to tech switch to counter a push that is coming. With Zerg's ability to swap between various tech options, they could force a tech switch from Protoss that may be next to impossible to hold off. Why is this bad? Because Zerg has a slight edge over Protoss in the time before the supply cap hits (examine the efficiency of roaches versus the gateway as an example). In this hypothetical, the Zerg must only spend as much as the Protoss to win - as the Protoss is stuck with his same unit composition or a very similar one after the army has been defeated, while Zerg has one that is far more variable. | ||
| ||
