|
LSN:
On July 24 2013 23:50 Nebuchad wrote:
How about starting with some mutas, as the terran base doesn't automatically start with anti-air defenses ready everywhere, and then transition into corrus when the terran is sufficiently defended and the mutas' helpfulness decreases.
If you're gonna call me a retard, at least do it in a way that doesn't make it obvious you haven't read what I wrote.
It seems zergs are encountering an issue. Your solution is to post on this forum a post I've read at least 125000 times, and wait for Blizzard to do your job for you. My solution is to search an alternative.
Your solution is easier, I'll give you that. It's also not the right way to approach a game.
And PLEASE don't ever call me a terran again~~
|
On July 25 2013 00:42 willstertben wrote:
there simply is no serious imbalance in zvt when zerg reaches 4 base hive tech with a flock of 12 muta. it's difficult but mostly a mechanics war and the better player usually wins.
the problem is getting there and not taking game ending damage while teching up.
+1 couldn't said it better myself. All hail Ben! Defly well said 
|
On July 25 2013 00:48 Nebuchad wrote:LSN: Show nested quote +On July 24 2013 23:50 Nebuchad wrote:
How about starting with some mutas, as the terran base doesn't automatically start with anti-air defenses ready everywhere, and then transition into corrus when the terran is sufficiently defended and the mutas' helpfulness decreases. If you're gonna call me a retard, at least do it in a way that doesn't make it obvious you haven't read what I wrote. It seems zergs are encountering an issue. Your solution is to post on this forum a post I've read at least 125000 times, and wait for Blizzard to do your job for you. My solution is to search an alternative. Your solution is easier, I'll give you that. It's also not the right way to approach a game. And PLEASE don't ever call me a terran again~~
lol I didnt call you retard, its you using these words, and I don't really get what you are talking about. If you still try to talk corruptor vs bio viable then just forget about it. Its bs.
And there is no solution. The way it goes now is that bio just overpowers z units and combined with mines there is no cost effecive way to fight vs bio anymore. Mines furthermore make the terran nearly 100% safe vs anything that zergs previously could have done to harrass. Its just a loss to attack the terran at any stage without killing it totally. There are very few situations that allow swapping fight units vs T buildings/scvs mostly when the Z is miles ahead or miles behind (all-in).
And using 25 banelings to bust a PF means instant death for the Z in the T counter attack and not any advantage for the zerg lol just as any other attack on the terran that doesnt kill him fully.
Actually not terran needs the +2 armour upgrade for buildings but zerg.
|
On July 25 2013 00:17 stratmatt wrote:
corrupters have more range, more dps, and less liklyhood of clumping than mutas. They can also morph into broodlords and are a much better investment towards the lategame. Saying they cant 'catch' medivacs is bullshit because terran should be free to retreat if they dont want to lose everything but should also have to risk losing medivacs to corrupters if they wish to stand and fight.
no, thats all simply not tue. mutalisks have more dps than corruptors vs nonmassive units!
coruptor strengh is HP/armor, which doesnt help you a lot to kill medivacs.
then you add how much faster mutas are and that they can attack ground and cost slightly less and that HP regeneration. Its just way better.
Also I think all airunits clump equally, but would have to doublecheck the editor.
And people dont really want to transition into broodlords these days. It simply didnt work out for most zergs who tried (e.g. Symbol, Life against Innovation both got rolled pretty hard during/after their broodlord transition)
Just think about the following: corruptors intercept a drop, the drop boosts back and unloads. corruptors are now pinned back for some time by a single drop. same scenario with mutas: mutas follow the drop, kill everything and are now free to defend the next drop/attack or even pressure/scout themselves.
|
On July 25 2013 01:14 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2013 00:17 stratmatt wrote:
corrupters have more range, more dps, and less liklyhood of clumping than mutas. They can also morph into broodlords and are a much better investment towards the lategame. Saying they cant 'catch' medivacs is bullshit because terran should be free to retreat if they dont want to lose everything but should also have to risk losing medivacs to corrupters if they wish to stand and fight. no, thats all simply not tue. mutalisks have more dps than corruptors vs nonmassive units!
No they dont, not vs medis.
|
On July 25 2013 00:03 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2013 00:00 willstertben wrote:On July 24 2013 23:56 Plansix wrote:On July 24 2013 23:55 willstertben wrote:On July 24 2013 23:50 Nebuchad wrote:On July 24 2013 23:32 clitvin wrote:On July 24 2013 23:18 Nebuchad wrote:On July 24 2013 23:15 willstertben wrote:On July 24 2013 23:10 Usernameffs wrote:
I know have to fix marines vs muta if thats a problem. Blizzard wants to see mutas being used in zvt and the fix wouldn't effect them in zvp. Just make bonus dmg to light. Maybe not now because its not that bad but if it becomes bad in zvt maybe. So instead of 15 muta loosing to 5 marines they maybe lose to 10 marines now bonus dmg to light = mutas now counter hydras and infested terrans. only reason people make mutas in zvt is cause they're the only unit that can kill medivacs and you need to kill medivacs otherwise you automatically lose the game. if it weren't for that then nobody would make mutas zvt, as they suck in fights, suck as harass (vs turret/mine/marine reinforcements), are expensive as fuck and stay on low upgrades vs 3-3 bio all game. In that case Revival (or whoever it was, but I think Revival) was ahead of meta building corruptors. They are better at killing medivacs, and they will facilitate a transition to broods later on. If mutas really are useless against this comp other than killing vacs, then corrus are the future. How does that make any sense at all??? Mutas are pretty shit in a straight up fight but they can at least attack marines/mines. Corruptors can't attack them at all.... so how would that be a better choice in any situation? Nevermind the fact that they cost more as well.. Was reacting to willsterbten's notion that the mutas are only good at killing medivacs... In most games I see, the players lose a ton of mutas, replenish them constantly, and end up spending a large fuckton of their gas on them. If he's right that mutas are useless outside of killing medivacs, then zergs are doing something wrong building so many of them. The two possible reactions are either build less mutas (and you won't catch a single medivac ever), or try something else (hence corru suggestion). How about starting with some mutas, as the terran base doesn't automatically start with anti-air defenses ready everywhere, and then transition into corrus when the terran is sufficiently defended and the mutas' helpfulness decreases. "corrus" can't catch medivacs therefore they aren't a valid choice for killing medivacs. By that standard, protoss can't kill medivacs either, since nothing can catch them when they are boosted. But we all know thats not true. 1. mass medivacs is bad vs protoss so you don't need to kill them as badly, colossus also limits medivac count, drops are less of an issue in pvt as in zvt. 2. blink 3. feedback Yeah, and I can list off the things that zerg has to kill them and say all the same stuff: Queens at every base, 1 or 2 of them. Mutas can catch unboosted medivacs when they try to escape Fungle Just because you list stuff doesn't make it easy. And protoss fear mass medivac the same way you do.
Uh, mass Medivac sucks ass in TvP. When I see a Terran go mass Medivac, I just defend drops, get 3-5 Colossi, a couple of HTs, and waltz across the map. Protoss definitely has an easier time dealing with Medivacs themselves than Zerg does, but I don't think Medivacs are really a problem in any matchup, so it doesn't particularly matter. While Protoss has better ways of actually nullifying the Medivacs (Feedback, Blink stalkers, hell, even Phoenixes are viable in PvT now sometimes) Zerg has better map control than Protoss (Overlord Spread, Creep, fast Zerglings) and can therefore spot a lot of drops before they get to your base.
Fungal/Queens aren't very good against Medivacs. Fungal, in particular, is amazingly bad against speed boosted Medivacs.
Stalkers don't come with blink and its the last upgrade protoss get in PvT, like after 3/3.
What?! What sort of PvT style are you playing? The only styles I can think of that skip Blink entirely in order to get 3/3 are like Phoenix/Colossus into third into Templar with late upgrades and Charge first. Why would you ever not get Blink? It's not very expensive, and it's practically essential for defending your Colossi against Vikings. Without Blink, you're basically going to be wasting Storms zoning Vikings every two seconds and won't have any left for the battle.
Medivacs are scary because a protoss can loss colossi to vikings and then you either rebuild or got HTs.
What...? Medivacs are good units, don't get me wrong, but if a Terran decides to go mass Medivac instead of Vikings, it's pretty much impossible for him to ever kill my Colossi unless he wins the game at like 10 minutes or something. There's not really any way for bio to win against Chargelot/Colossus/Stalker if the Terran goes Medivacs instead of Vikings. Your line of reasoning about rewarping HTs only really applies if the Terran massively over makes Vikings and completely skips Ghosts.
But hitting a great storm agaist stimed bio isn't easy either.
It's definitely more reliable than Fungaling retreating Medivacs, because bio units are generally attacking you rather than sprinting away from you (even if they're stutter-stepping). I'm not saying that it's easier than Fungaling Medivacs, because Terrans make more of an effort to stop Storms from happening than post-battle Fungals, but there's no way the two are similar.
|
On July 25 2013 00:38 Orek wrote:
No split Zerg & too many muta criticism from Terran makes sense.
Swarm host vs bio & corruptor suggestion from Terran doesn't make sense.
That's how I read the last few pages. Zerg needs to improve and innovate for sure, but not in these ways. Both sides need to chill if you ask me.
Well, those midgameheavy mutalisksstyles have been the result of every Korean Zerg getting rolled during the Hivetransition. while soulkey, jaedong, symbol and Hyun (or stephano on foreign level) all were during rather well by delaying hivw more and more in favor of timings and heavymutalisk play.
It's not zergs playing wrongly, but zergs reacting to not being able to reach their T3 as fast as they tried to.
Maybe it's the wrong approach, but it has been the more successful playstyle lately.
For the splitting, sure people should split against mines. in all other scenarios a splitting zerg is way weaker when being spread than clumped due to range differences. I mean there is a huge differemce between splitting as Terran - which should always be done when playing against a zerg (of he doesnt have splash, marines win anyway) or as a zerg who should only spread upon seeing a mine in ZvT. else the melee units simply attack less and the marines more.
|
Split as in you want a good surround and mitigate splash damage.... yes the Split is only useful against Bio mine but look at it this way.... Think about how the match up would be if they removed mines... you would just A move and Right click on marines and you would win about 80-90% of engages.... which is what you did before the widow mine with infestor play except there it was combo of fungal to keep us in place to not have any micro and use A move with banes LOL Kinda laughable for micro when you are looking from the other side... Now Terran has their own "Bane" which actually requires good placement and an extra micro and positional forethought which is exactly what zerg should be doing with their placement and engages .... No more A-Move and macro what you have to and looking back at the engage with your army still standing is what blizzard wanted.... Its what they got....
|
On July 25 2013 01:28 stratmatt wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2013 01:14 Big J wrote:On July 25 2013 00:17 stratmatt wrote:
corrupters have more range, more dps, and less liklyhood of clumping than mutas. They can also morph into broodlords and are a much better investment towards the lategame. Saying they cant 'catch' medivacs is bullshit because terran should be free to retreat if they dont want to lose everything but should also have to risk losing medivacs to corrupters if they wish to stand and fight. no, thats all simply not tue. mutalisks have more dps than corruptors vs nonmassive units! No they dont, not vs medis.
7.4 (corruptor) vs 5.9+2+0.6 (mutalisk)
after armor has been applies and with corruption I guess they are a tiny bit better. which is still irrelevant for real gameplay and still makes them have only equal dps per cost. the only really relevant thing in combat is he HP/armor, so marines dont shred them at the same rate. apart from that, corruptors only have disadvantages vs the currently played TvZ stLe.
|
On July 25 2013 01:40 Pirfiktshon wrote:
Split as in you want a good surround and mitigate splash damage.... yes the Split is only useful against Bio mine but look at it this way.... Think about how the match up would be if they removed mines... you would just A move and Right click on marines and you would win about 80-90% of engages.... which is what you did before the widow mine with infestor play except there it was combo of fungal to keep us in place to not have any micro and use A move with banes LOL Kinda laughable for micro when you are looking from the other side... Now Terran has their own "Bane" which actually requires good placement and an extra micro and positional forethought which is exactly what zerg should be doing with their placement and engages .... No more A-Move and macro what you have to and looking back at the engage with your army still standing is what blizzard wanted.... Its what they got....
Hey, Im not against minea or something. Im just pointing out how this splitting argument ("soulkeys splits are bad") simply doesnt make sense. it's a completely different form of splitting that is being required than what T does against banes/fungals.
It's not a simple "copy what terrans have been doing for your banelings" type of thing, that some people make it sound to be. else some offracing Terran would have helped hos zerg brothers already to develop it in some korean teamhouse (assuming they havent tried that).
|
On July 25 2013 01:40 Pirfiktshon wrote:
Split as in you want a good surround and mitigate splash damage.... yes the Split is only useful against Bio mine but look at it this way.... Think about how the match up would be if they removed mines... you would just A move and Right click on marines and you would win about 80-90% of engages.... which is what you did before the widow mine with infestor play except there it was combo of fungal to keep us in place to not have any micro and use A move with banes LOL Kinda laughable for micro when you are looking from the other side... Now Terran has their own "Bane" which actually requires good placement and an extra micro and positional forethought which is exactly what zerg should be doing with their placement and engages .... No more A-Move and macro what you have to and looking back at the engage with your army still standing is what blizzard wanted.... Its what they got....
I've found going mines to be significantly less micro than going tanks. And without window mines, it goes back to terran building tanks. Zerg did not with 80-90% of engagements before mines (pre queen buff). I personally prefer watching tanks more than mines. Tanks required more forethought, more positioning, and actually required more micro.
By the way, it's laughable that you think banes are a-move while mines require lots of micro. Tell me how many top korean terrans actually micro the mines, because it's a very small number.
|
There is more than target-firing to micro. That is actually why I go siege tanks as terran vs zerg instead of widow mines, I simply now from myself that after early game my micro isn't good enough to handle widow mines + bio. Not saying siege tanks don't require skill, I just think they require less micro (so I use them, despite fairly heavy downsides).
First of all, enough terrans use burrow/unburrow micro. Then we got placing them, also a main reason for me to use tanks: if you get surprised and you immediatly siege up all your tanks, they will be placed far from ideal, but good chance they still do their job. Same thing with widow mines, and large part of them is clumped up somewhere and die to two banelings.
Aditionally with widow mines it is far more important to micro your bio well. Don't do that, and widow mines kill as much friendly units as enemy units.
I actually tested that a while back: Equal cost/supply lings vs marines + widow mines, all unmicro'd (marines stimmed). Result was a draw, widow mines killed everything.
|
jesus christ this thread feels like a fucking time portal to 2010 or some shit
zergs, protip
dont spend 3k gas on mutas every game, build 12, dont lose them because given their speed there is no excuse for that, go immediately to ultras, even if it means delaying your 2/2 or 3/3, get them out and its smooth fucking sailing
dont spend 1k gas on a bane bust, just because you have mutas and terran took a third. this isn't wings of liberty anymore, you're not doing anything but putting yourself extremely behind going for these cheap wins
|
I'm not saying banes are A-Move micro I'm trying to say You MUST Micro them now and I was stating that if you just remove Widow mines like you want and keep MMM then what will happen at this stage of the game? Then it will turn into an A-Move situation.....
|
On July 25 2013 02:09 Sissors wrote:
There is more than target-firing to micro. That is actually why I go siege tanks as terran vs zerg instead of widow mines, I simply now from myself that after early game my micro isn't good enough to handle widow mines + bio. Not saying siege tanks don't require skill, I just think they require less micro (so I use them, despite fairly heavy downsides).
First of all, enough terrans use burrow/unburrow micro. Then we got placing them, also a main reason for me to use tanks: if you get surprised and you immediatly siege up all your tanks, they will be placed far from ideal, but good chance they still do their job. Same thing with widow mines, and large part of them is clumped up somewhere and die to two banelings.
Aditionally with widow mines it is far more important to micro your bio well. Don't do that, and widow mines kill as much friendly units as enemy units.
I actually tested that a while back: Equal cost/supply lings vs marines + widow mines, all unmicro'd (marines stimmed). Result was a draw, widow mines killed everything.
well, that means all the mines survived, which sounds like a pretty huge amount if it was enough to do that much friendlysplash.
|
On July 25 2013 02:09 Sissors wrote:
There is more than target-firing to micro. That is actually why I go siege tanks as terran vs zerg instead of widow mines, I simply now from myself that after early game my micro isn't good enough to handle widow mines + bio. Not saying siege tanks don't require skill, I just think they require less micro (so I use them, despite fairly heavy downsides).
First of all, enough terrans use burrow/unburrow micro. Then we got placing them, also a main reason for me to use tanks: if you get surprised and you immediatly siege up all your tanks, they will be placed far from ideal, but good chance they still do their job. Same thing with widow mines, and large part of them is clumped up somewhere and die to two banelings.
Aditionally with widow mines it is far more important to micro your bio well. Don't do that, and widow mines kill as much friendly units as enemy units.
I actually tested that a while back: Equal cost/supply lings vs marines + widow mines, all unmicro'd (marines stimmed). Result was a draw, widow mines killed everything.
how's that a draw? mines killed everything, mines survived, success for terran.
On July 25 2013 02:15 c0sm0naut wrote:
jesus christ this thread feels like a fucking time portal to 2010 or some shit
zergs, protip
dont spend 3k gas on mutas every game, build 12, dont lose them because given their speed there is no excuse for that, go immediately to ultras, even if it means delaying your 2/2 or 3/3, get them out and its smooth fucking sailing
dont spend 1k gas on a bane bust, just because you have mutas and terran took a third. this isn't wings of liberty anymore, you're not doing anything but putting yourself extremely behind going for these cheap wins
yes this is standard play. and then you die to 65 scv 3 base marine mine rally while going hive.
maybe the short term solution to this is something like 3 base hive stop at +1 attack and get +3 armor or something + delayed 4th base but i'd rather blizzard just fix something about that push than zerg having to play from that far behind just so they don't die against a simple push - it's not even an allin by any stretch that terran choses to do or not to do from the same setup that transitions really well into drop heavy mass pf lategame.
also: you can't delay armor upgrades to get ultras out, as ultras without 3 armor and plating get countered by 3 attack marines.
|
I personally feel like TvZ might use some tweaks, but with a extra caution, Maru vs. Symbol in game 3 made me remember the dim last year of WoL with the horrible TvZ metagame.
I personally would suggest a very tiny immunity to widow mine after a unit gets hit by it, perhaps just by 2 seconds. This would stop things like a flock of mutas getting instakilled by widow mines.
|
how's that a draw? mines killed everything, mines survived, success for terran.
Overseers.
|
|
|
On July 25 2013 03:02 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +how's that a draw? mines killed everything, mines survived, success for terran. Overseers.
to oversee the minefield while more units of both sides arrive. with equal production, as zerg cant outproduce terran midgame as they have same income and spend it fully on units in the midgame.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
