|
This thread is going nowhere and I'm tired of dealing with it. Either drop the personal attacks and whining and replace it with actual discussion or it'll be closed.
12:09 KST Page 98 |
On June 26 2012 22:29 Meff wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2012 21:06 Snowbear wrote:On June 26 2012 19:57 Meff wrote:On June 26 2012 19:03 moki wrote:On June 26 2012 18:28 Protosnake wrote:
It wasnt that "unbalanced" but it was pretty much a nobrainer, you could contain a Z on 2 base, deny creep, deny map control, get safe against any zergling aggression and could potentially end the game with a runby
So just like how speedlings works in the early/midgame? That does not sound very unfair. Well, there are some differences between T and Z that make this actually quite different from a speedling contain. Here are a few: 1) Z needs to be ahead in bases to survive. 2 base against 2 base is considered being at an advantage for T. Wrong wrong wrong: infestor + hive can trade cost efficient with terran, so 3 base vs 3 base is perfectly possible. Please play the game at high masters or above, so you understand it. Instead of trying to bringing things on a personal, condescending level, why don't you take a moment to elaborate on what you're saying? That way this forum and specifically this thread could be used to improve somebody's understanding of the game, which seems much more constructive. ('sides, you don't really need to be high masters to know that infestors + broods or ultras can be cost efficient vT, but that's another issue) Specifically, I don't quite get how hive tech and infestors are relevant when discussing the differences between two early-midgame situations (a speedling contain on 2 bases and a hellion contain on 2 bases). Could you elaborate? Saying that Z does fine on hive tech 3b vs 3b doesn't quite imply that it does the same on hatch/lair tech for 2b vs 2b.
Ling infestor isn't hive tech and replaces the muta ling baneling composition, and it works fine against marine tank or any equivalent mech force with some roaches mixed in I guess as needed. The additional benefits of this is that it lets you get upgrades earlier, tech faster, survive on less bases and is a lot easier to control.
|
4713 Posts
On June 26 2012 22:18 drumsolo86 wrote:
Seriously, now complaining about mass infestors vs ghosts?
The ghost can render the infestor useless or dead in 1-on-1 situation. Even in PvTs, ghosts in numbers have proven to be really powerful and standing up to High Templars which can take out ghosts or render them useless in a mass situation, before you say ghosts themselves on their own cannot handle mass infestors, please think carefully.
The situation is like avc said. Infestors are best fought with ghosts, but not many people do that, does that mean it cant work? No. On top of that, Bomber didn't build 1 single ghost at all (really surprising when he was trying out all the new strats in the book, 3/3 Bcs and sky-terran builds). Furthermore, Bomber is the few Terrans I really support.
Back on track to the topic started, enough infestor shenanigans please.
Big difference, between HT and Infestors.
First, HT are much, much smaller then Infestors, so its easier to get an EMP that will hit more then 2-3.
Secondly HT are much, much slower then Infestors, so its again way easier to land those EMPs.
Lastly detection in TvP can be sniped much easier then in TvZ.
I actually am surprised people haven't brought up the infestor issue earlier. Its basically good with any unit composition and its used in any match up, its good in small numbers as well as in large numbers. Its just as versatile, or more so then Ghosts used to be before they got nerfed. I am 100% that, if history was altered and NesTea would have roflstomped Mvp with mass infestors on the last game on Shakuras plateau, then it would have been infestors hit by the nerfbat.
When you look at the reasons why Ghosts where nerfed its a wonder the infestors has remained under the radar for so long.
|
I haven't watched the game but why couldn't bomber go siege tank heavy vs mass infestor?
|
On June 26 2012 22:03 GeNeSiDe wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2012 21:59 avc wrote:On June 26 2012 21:54 Evangelist wrote:On June 26 2012 21:50 avc wrote:
It doesn't surprise me that some truly silly Terran players are already moaning about Infestors in this thread, you'll just end up getting it locked by dragging it off topic. You've already been warned over the whining, drop it already.
If you genuinely believe that the Bomber vs. Freaky game means that Infestors counter everything and are unstoppable then no wonder you're complaining about Queens. It's not whining, what we saw was the actual result of all this zerg theorycrafting on how to beat zerg late game and it couldn't even win against ONE of the three components it was supposed to be victorious against! Fortunately we did see some good pure bio timings designed to crush zerg early game so we don't have to play the ludicrous late game TvZ anymore, but still. Come on. That was utterly stupid and proves virtually everything we've been saying about lategame TvZ. Bomber played it terribly, he should have won game 2 comfortably. He made many mistakes and refused to build a single Ghosts in the face of an exclusively caster army. You know if I try to break down a supply depot wall with only lings and they all die to marines, it doesn't mean supply depots are OP, it means I didn't use the right strategy. Some of you people will whine at literally anything. I literally do not get how people think ghost is an answer. Show me a replay where ghosts work vs infestors. The only way this works is when your doing a timing push, and your opponent is banking on a minimal number of infestors to make his 2-2 cracklings efficient enough to roll over you, and you get off those money EMP's and roflstomp him. Vs 30-40 infestors, again....chain fungal..... you can maybe EMP the lead infestors but your losing your ghosts, again the zerg is trading energy for units......it seems very simple to me.
Fungal, snipe, psi storm, forcefield (arguably), HSM.
If you want to nerf fungal, so be it, but arguing against spells that do damage encompasses a lot more than just fungal.
|
On June 26 2012 22:34 Doodsmack wrote:
I haven't watched the game but why couldn't bomber go siege tank heavy vs mass infestor?
He went MMM+Tank and turtled on five bases getting mass Ravens, 3/3 Air Upgrades, and Battlecrusiers. He was also on Atlantis Spaceship.
As a Terran player, anyone who says Ghosts are useless vs Infestors are kidding themselves. Bomber definitely should've gotten Ghosts to go with the BCs. However, it doesn't excuse the fact that Zerg destroyed an actual lategame Terran army(!!!) with 40+ Infestors. This is a combination of Infestors being way too versatile and Ravens having shit spells aside from PDD.
|
On June 26 2012 22:37 BoxingKangaroo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2012 22:03 GeNeSiDe wrote:On June 26 2012 21:59 avc wrote:On June 26 2012 21:54 Evangelist wrote:On June 26 2012 21:50 avc wrote:
It doesn't surprise me that some truly silly Terran players are already moaning about Infestors in this thread, you'll just end up getting it locked by dragging it off topic. You've already been warned over the whining, drop it already.
If you genuinely believe that the Bomber vs. Freaky game means that Infestors counter everything and are unstoppable then no wonder you're complaining about Queens. It's not whining, what we saw was the actual result of all this zerg theorycrafting on how to beat zerg late game and it couldn't even win against ONE of the three components it was supposed to be victorious against! Fortunately we did see some good pure bio timings designed to crush zerg early game so we don't have to play the ludicrous late game TvZ anymore, but still. Come on. That was utterly stupid and proves virtually everything we've been saying about lategame TvZ. Bomber played it terribly, he should have won game 2 comfortably. He made many mistakes and refused to build a single Ghosts in the face of an exclusively caster army. You know if I try to break down a supply depot wall with only lings and they all die to marines, it doesn't mean supply depots are OP, it means I didn't use the right strategy. Some of you people will whine at literally anything. I literally do not get how people think ghost is an answer. Show me a replay where ghosts work vs infestors. The only way this works is when your doing a timing push, and your opponent is banking on a minimal number of infestors to make his 2-2 cracklings efficient enough to roll over you, and you get off those money EMP's and roflstomp him. Vs 30-40 infestors, again....chain fungal..... you can maybe EMP the lead infestors but your losing your ghosts, again the zerg is trading energy for units......it seems very simple to me. Fungal, snipe, psi storm, forcefield (arguably), HSM. If you want to nerf fungal, so be it, but arguing against spells that do damage encompasses a lot more than just fungal.
How good do you reckon mass HT with no support is? Or mass Sentry? They're pretty awful against pretty much any normal unit composition. Which makes a lot of sense, because they're meant to be support units, and not the core of your army. Mass Ghost was actually pretty decent, which is one of the reasons Ghosts got nerfed. Mass Raven is similarly awful.
|
On June 26 2012 22:42 HeroMystic wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2012 22:34 Doodsmack wrote:
I haven't watched the game but why couldn't bomber go siege tank heavy vs mass infestor? He went MMM+Tank and turtled on five bases getting mass Ravens, 3/3 Air Upgrades, and Battlecrusiers. He was also on Atlantis Spaceship. As a Terran player, anyone who says Ghosts are useless vs Infestors are kidding themselves. Bomber definitely should've gotten Ghosts to go with the BCs. However, it doesn't excuse the fact that Zerg destroyed an actual lategame Terran army(!!!) with 40+ Infestors. This is a combination of Infestors being way too versatile and Ravens having shit spells aside from PDD.
That doesn't answer my question because that's not a tank heavy army.
|
On June 26 2012 18:04 Deckkie wrote:
I have a question for the swarm.
How did you guys feel about ZvT pre patch.
From a Terran point of view I loved it. It was a solid opening that gave map control until Zerg could take it over. It opened a lot of tech, there were many way to go for a two base timing or go for a fast third. All together it has been by far my favorite TvZ meta.
But when I think like that I see the possibility that Zerg maybe didnt like it as much. I think you enjoyed the little struggle of Hellion vs spine and queen, into taking over map control. But how was it to work against so many follow ups? Was it very hard to be able to see the difference between a fst thrid and a two base all in? How was the mass Hellion all-in? Did you often go into mid game feeling far behind? And if there was trouble scouting, do you think the overlord speed buff would be sufficient enough to help in that regard?
Well in my opinion, ZvT was generally speaking a good matchup but it did have a few major things that annoyed me...some of these things are gone some of these things still exist, which is fine, not everything that annoys me should simply go away.
For one, I found Hellion openings incredibly obnoxious. Hellions would deny map control and vision, and deny creep tumors and 3rd bases for a very long time, in fact many times it was nearly impossible to ever get creep beyond the natural ramp if hellions were lurking outside and you'd almost always be forced to get a couple of Roaches if you ever wanted to do something about it in the early game. Of course all of this meant you had little to no clue what the Terran was doing, is he taking a fast 3CC or is he doing a 1base all-in? Who knows? You've entirely got to rely on 1 single slow overlord to figure that out, but if Terran has 3 marines at the edge of his base you simply see nothing.
Now, all of that really bothered me, but the part I found worst was when Terran players just tucked their head between their balls, grabbed their entire Hellion army and said "FUCK IT BOYS WE'RE GOIN IN!" and simply blindly bum rush you with hellions and hope that there is a tiny gap in your defence which will result in Zerg losing like 40 or so Drones. It was absolutely ridiculous, and it was surprisingly common too since essentially even if my defense is absolutely perfect and I kill every last Hellion and lose absolutely no drones it hardly matters to the Terran anyways, just a handful of lost minerals.
Having said all that, I think sure, Queens are a lot stronger now and Overlord speed is great, but c'mon Terrans stop crying a bit. Yeah we get it, you feel like the red-haired step child and want a buff, but just suck it up and find a way to deal with it in the meantime. Every race has periods were they get stomped on for a while due to this or that, just try not to cry so damn much christ it's embarrasing.
Actually, back in the day most Terrans would mock me or tell me to stfu when I was pissed about bad Zerg maps like Lost Temple and most of the Terrans would just act like cocky assholes, so really I don't have much sympathy, karma is a bitch.
PS: Terrans also love to cry about how they have to be agressive and do damage and "Thats just not faaaaaaaiiiiiiir!!!" but guess what, Zerg has to do the same thing vs Protoss because believe it or not but a big late-game deathball with archons and a mothership is nearly unbeatable, so suck it up is what I'm saying I guess.
|
On June 26 2012 22:33 Destructicon wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2012 22:18 drumsolo86 wrote:
Seriously, now complaining about mass infestors vs ghosts?
The ghost can render the infestor useless or dead in 1-on-1 situation. Even in PvTs, ghosts in numbers have proven to be really powerful and standing up to High Templars which can take out ghosts or render them useless in a mass situation, before you say ghosts themselves on their own cannot handle mass infestors, please think carefully.
The situation is like avc said. Infestors are best fought with ghosts, but not many people do that, does that mean it cant work? No. On top of that, Bomber didn't build 1 single ghost at all (really surprising when he was trying out all the new strats in the book, 3/3 Bcs and sky-terran builds). Furthermore, Bomber is the few Terrans I really support.
Back on track to the topic started, enough infestor shenanigans please. Big difference, between HT and Infestors. First, HT are much, much smaller then Infestors, so its easier to get an EMP that will hit more then 2-3. Secondly HT are much, much slower then Infestors, so its again way easier to land those EMPs. Lastly detection in TvP can be sniped much easier then in TvZ. I actually am surprised people haven't brought up the infestor issue earlier. Its basically good with any unit composition and its used in any match up, its good in small numbers as well as in large numbers. Its just as versatile, or more so then Ghosts used to be before they got nerfed. I am 100% that, if history was altered and NesTea would have roflstomped Mvp with mass infestors on the last game on Shakuras plateau, then it would have been infestors hit by the nerfbat. When you look at the reasons why Ghosts where nerfed its a wonder the infestors has remained under the radar for so long.
Well, I mean you're left with two options why it hasn't been nerfed:
1. Infestors aren't actually that good and can be countered.
2. Infestors are really that good, it's just that pro's don't know it yet. Therefore they haven't shown up on Blizz's radar. Mass infestor isn't really used at the highest level. I mean we've got 1 Code A game as evidence, and what?
Good luck arguing for number 2. There's some precedent for things like this happening (blue flame hellions), but you're basically saying you know better than the pros. And if you want to argue that, then I've got a good counter to Zerg - mass Ravens. 
|
On June 26 2012 22:43 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2012 22:42 HeroMystic wrote:On June 26 2012 22:34 Doodsmack wrote:
I haven't watched the game but why couldn't bomber go siege tank heavy vs mass infestor? He went MMM+Tank and turtled on five bases getting mass Ravens, 3/3 Air Upgrades, and Battlecrusiers. He was also on Atlantis Spaceship. As a Terran player, anyone who says Ghosts are useless vs Infestors are kidding themselves. Bomber definitely should've gotten Ghosts to go with the BCs. However, it doesn't excuse the fact that Zerg destroyed an actual lategame Terran army(!!!) with 40+ Infestors. This is a combination of Infestors being way too versatile and Ravens having shit spells aside from PDD. That doesn't answer my question because that's not a tank heavy army.
Your question was answered. He spent the majority of his time getting MMM+Tank and getting Mass Ravens, 3/3 Air Upgrades, and Battlecrusiers. The Mass Infestors was a response to the BC/Raven army.
|
On June 26 2012 22:43 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2012 22:42 HeroMystic wrote:On June 26 2012 22:34 Doodsmack wrote:
I haven't watched the game but why couldn't bomber go siege tank heavy vs mass infestor? He went MMM+Tank and turtled on five bases getting mass Ravens, 3/3 Air Upgrades, and Battlecrusiers. He was also on Atlantis Spaceship. As a Terran player, anyone who says Ghosts are useless vs Infestors are kidding themselves. Bomber definitely should've gotten Ghosts to go with the BCs. However, it doesn't excuse the fact that Zerg destroyed an actual lategame Terran army(!!!) with 40+ Infestors. This is a combination of Infestors being way too versatile and Ravens having shit spells aside from PDD. That doesn't answer my question because that's not a tank heavy army.
Probably because Tank heavy compositions do really badly against Hive tech, which Freaky was sometimes-utilising alongside the Infestors. Their usefulness is also highly questionable against Infestor/Ling with burrow, as Stephano frequently demonstrates.
Edit:
On June 26 2012 22:47 BeeNu wrote:PS: Terrans also love to cry about how they have to be agressive and do damage and "Thats just not faaaaaaaiiiiiiir!!!" but guess what, Zerg has to do the same thing vs Protoss because believe it or not but a big late-game deathball with archons and a mothership is nearly unbeatable, so suck it up is what I'm saying I guess.
I think you're playing ZvP backwards. It's Protoss that has to do damage to Zerg, and Zerg who have the near unbeatable late game army unless they make a mistake and throw 20 Broodlords into a Vortex. That's why half the PvZs you see are 2 base all-ins by the Protoss.
|
On June 26 2012 22:43 Toadvine wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2012 22:37 BoxingKangaroo wrote:On June 26 2012 22:03 GeNeSiDe wrote:On June 26 2012 21:59 avc wrote:On June 26 2012 21:54 Evangelist wrote:On June 26 2012 21:50 avc wrote:
It doesn't surprise me that some truly silly Terran players are already moaning about Infestors in this thread, you'll just end up getting it locked by dragging it off topic. You've already been warned over the whining, drop it already.
If you genuinely believe that the Bomber vs. Freaky game means that Infestors counter everything and are unstoppable then no wonder you're complaining about Queens. It's not whining, what we saw was the actual result of all this zerg theorycrafting on how to beat zerg late game and it couldn't even win against ONE of the three components it was supposed to be victorious against! Fortunately we did see some good pure bio timings designed to crush zerg early game so we don't have to play the ludicrous late game TvZ anymore, but still. Come on. That was utterly stupid and proves virtually everything we've been saying about lategame TvZ. Bomber played it terribly, he should have won game 2 comfortably. He made many mistakes and refused to build a single Ghosts in the face of an exclusively caster army. You know if I try to break down a supply depot wall with only lings and they all die to marines, it doesn't mean supply depots are OP, it means I didn't use the right strategy. Some of you people will whine at literally anything. I literally do not get how people think ghost is an answer. Show me a replay where ghosts work vs infestors. The only way this works is when your doing a timing push, and your opponent is banking on a minimal number of infestors to make his 2-2 cracklings efficient enough to roll over you, and you get off those money EMP's and roflstomp him. Vs 30-40 infestors, again....chain fungal..... you can maybe EMP the lead infestors but your losing your ghosts, again the zerg is trading energy for units......it seems very simple to me. Fungal, snipe, psi storm, forcefield (arguably), HSM. If you want to nerf fungal, so be it, but arguing against spells that do damage encompasses a lot more than just fungal. How good do you reckon mass HT with no support is? Or mass Sentry? They're pretty awful against pretty much any normal unit composition. Which makes a lot of sense, because they're meant to be support units, and not the core of your army. Mass Ghost was actually pretty decent, which is one of the reasons Ghosts got nerfed. Mass Raven is similarly awful.
Ok, so you just want spellcasters to not be able to be massed. Fine. It's just your last post made a point of saying "again the zerg is trading energy for units" with no qualifier. Guess that was just rhetoric huh?
|
On June 26 2012 22:47 BeeNu wrote:
PS: Terrans also love to cry about how they have to be agressive and do damage and "Thats just not faaaaaaaiiiiiiir!!!" but guess what, Zerg has to do the same thing vs Protoss because believe it or not but a big late-game deathball with archons and a mothership is nearly unbeatable, so suck it up is what I'm saying I guess.
I find this hillarious because Protoss players have been saying for a long time that they have to do damage vs Zerg because their lategame army is unbeatable without a Mothership.
|
Im not arguing against the damage. I'm arguing that the infestor has it all.
The Infested Terran can be used to snipe bases, it can be used as a meat shield to break tank lines, en masse their raw DPS is really good and probably the highest DPS AA that Z has. Overall I'd say that this ability is fine though and does not need to be touched at all. The infestor was supposed to be a stealthy harass unit and the IT roles I've described fit this perfectly, forcing detection etc.
Fungal Growth...I dont really know where to begin. Should never have been buffed in beta, where it was a projectile(thus, avoidable with great micro/game sense) and SLOWED. The evolution of this ability is what worries me about it...the +to mechanical to give options to Z to counter mech; however it still countered bio perfectly, so now we have fungal+bane/ling which is cost-efficient vs bio, and fungal/roaches which decimates mech. Fungal/IF also decimates air. If this spell is tweaked I think infestors would still be strong, but it would be more balanced akin to the HT/ghost wars in TvP; as in you need to land more than 1 fungal to win a battle, because as it stands, once the spell is cast micro is impossible, when it was a projectile with slow, you could see where the fungal was going, try to avoid, and then also micro your units, albeit at reduced effectiveness
Neural Parasite is also a spell that I consider to be fine, it's meant to stop people massing T3 death units and to capture key units(tanks,thors, bcs etc). Not much wrong here.
The great problem is that this symmetry of options means the infestor does every job you could need from a standing army in the most cost-efficient manner, to the point that a Code B no-namer can turn up in GSTL and Code A, smash 3 different races with the same strategy, including one of the better TvZ players out there ATM, when it was clear throughout the Bomber V Freaky that Bomber was the superior player and should be in the ascendency, not fighting teeth and nails to get through.
And it relates to the Queen buff because previously no Zerg would be dumb enough to try something like that because the Terran would just push into your base before you reached critical mass of infestor energy to be able to kill his push outright; SC is a finely balanced game and that extra little edge is enough to 1. swing a battle 2. make the player back off out of fear like G2, Bomber prob could have bio out-microed Freaky but in his head I'm sure he realized how volatile it is to go bio vs mass infestor and thus the crazy game ensued.
|
Just theorycraft for a minute and imagine a combo of blinding swarm and fungal growth. Those 2 units will be all that Z ever needs to win, maybe a few lings to dance on the 1 range units while they get chain fungalled to death.
|
think you're playing ZvP backwards. It's Protoss that has to do damage to Zerg, and Zerg who have the near unbeatable late game army unless they make a mistake and throw 20 Broodlords into a Vortex. That's why half the PvZs you see are 2 base all-ins by the Protoss.
That's funny. Last major tournament I watched (was MLG maybe? I dunno) every time I saw a Protoss win a macro game it was with a Mothership. Every. Single. Time.
Also, the reason Protoss do 2base all-ins nearly every game isn't because they can't win a macro game, it's because 2base all-ins are easier and still incredibly effective.
On June 26 2012 22:54 HeroMystic wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2012 22:47 BeeNu wrote:
PS: Terrans also love to cry about how they have to be agressive and do damage and "Thats just not faaaaaaaiiiiiiir!!!" but guess what, Zerg has to do the same thing vs Protoss because believe it or not but a big late-game deathball with archons and a mothership is nearly unbeatable, so suck it up is what I'm saying I guess. I find this hillarious because Protoss players have been saying for a long time that they have to do damage vs Zerg because their lategame army is unbeatable without a Mothership.
To a degree that is true as well, but it all depends on how the game plays out. At different points in the game each race has to be doing damage to the other race unless the other person is going for certain tech routes which allow you to completely sit back and defend. Zerg does have good strength in the mid-lateish game, but like, really late game Protoss are stronger for the most part simply due to the Mothership. Although, mass Ultra/Baneling/Infestor seems like it could be a really strong composition and I haven't played with that too much myself since most of my ZvP don't go that late, but idk how it fares yet.
|
On June 26 2012 22:55 GeNeSiDe wrote:
Im not arguing against the damage. I'm arguing that the infestor has it all.
The Infested Terran can be used to snipe bases, it can be used as a meat shield to break tank lines, en masse their raw DPS is really good and probably the highest DPS AA that Z has. Overall I'd say that this ability is fine though and does not need to be touched at all. The infestor was supposed to be a stealthy harass unit and the IT roles I've described fit this perfectly, forcing detection etc.
Fungal Growth...I dont really know where to begin. Should never have been buffed in beta, where it was a projectile(thus, avoidable with great micro/game sense) and SLOWED. The evolution of this ability is what worries me about it...the +to mechanical to give options to Z to counter mech; however it still countered bio perfectly, so now we have fungal+bane/ling which is cost-efficient vs bio, and fungal/roaches which decimates mech. Fungal/IF also decimates air. If this spell is tweaked I think infestors would still be strong, but it would be more balanced akin to the HT/ghost wars in TvP; as in you need to land more than 1 fungal to win a battle, because as it stands, once the spell is cast micro is impossible, when it was a projectile with slow, you could see where the fungal was going, try to avoid, and then also micro your units, albeit at reduced effectiveness
Neural Parasite is also a spell that I consider to be fine, it's meant to stop people massing T3 death units and to capture key units(tanks,thors, bcs etc). Not much wrong here.
The great problem is that this symmetry of options means the infestor does every job you could need from a standing army in the most cost-efficient manner, to the point that a Code B no-namer can turn up in GSTL and Code A, smash 3 different races with the same strategy, including one of the better TvZ players out there ATM, when it was clear throughout the Bomber V Freaky that Bomber was the superior player and should be in the ascendency, not fighting teeth and nails to get through.
And it relates to the Queen buff because previously no Zerg would be dumb enough to try something like that because the Terran would just push into your base before you reached critical mass of infestor energy to be able to kill his push outright; SC is a finely balanced game and that extra little edge is enough to 1. swing a battle 2. make the player back off out of fear like G2, Bomber prob could have bio out-microed Freaky but in his head I'm sure he realized how volatile it is to go bio vs mass infestor and thus the crazy game ensued.
Just because they are the superior players, doesn't mean they will always win. Anyway, not a single zerg player went through today, so much for them being unbeatable.
While I do think infestors are strong, Bomber did a lot of crucial mistakes that match. He basically lost 14ravens to fungals because he didn't want to repair them when he had a big window of time to do so. He also barely repaired his BC army. If he would've brought some SCVs to repair them he would probably have won when he had like 15+. His BCs raped all infested terrans in the start, no matter how many Freaky threw out. The BCs numbers very very very slowly died until the infested terrans could clean them up. If he had repaired them they wouldn't have died and Freaky would have had no answer to them.
|
On June 26 2012 23:00 BeeNu wrote:Show nested quote + think you're playing ZvP backwards. It's Protoss that has to do damage to Zerg, and Zerg who have the near unbeatable late game army unless they make a mistake and throw 20 Broodlords into a Vortex. That's why half the PvZs you see are 2 base all-ins by the Protoss. That's funny. Last major tournament I watched (was MLG maybe? I dunno) every time I saw a Protoss win a macro game it was with a Mothership. Every. Single. Time. Also, the reason Protoss do 2base all-ins nearly every game isn't because they can't win a macro game, it's because 2base all-ins are easier and still incredibly effective. Show nested quote +On June 26 2012 22:54 HeroMystic wrote:On June 26 2012 22:47 BeeNu wrote:
PS: Terrans also love to cry about how they have to be agressive and do damage and "Thats just not faaaaaaaiiiiiiir!!!" but guess what, Zerg has to do the same thing vs Protoss because believe it or not but a big late-game deathball with archons and a mothership is nearly unbeatable, so suck it up is what I'm saying I guess. I find this hillarious because Protoss players have been saying for a long time that they have to do damage vs Zerg because their lategame army is unbeatable without a Mothership. To a degree that is true as well, but it all depends on how the game plays out. At different points in the game each race has to be doing damage to the other race unless the other person is going for certain tech routes which allow you to completely sit back and defend.
A lot of this is because Zerg fails to split their units, which is very much the reason why people believed Ravens's HSM would have similar effect. Once we see Zerg splitting their units then Mothership will stop being effective. It already happened vs Ravens.
|
On June 26 2012 23:00 BeeNu wrote:Show nested quote + think you're playing ZvP backwards. It's Protoss that has to do damage to Zerg, and Zerg who have the near unbeatable late game army unless they make a mistake and throw 20 Broodlords into a Vortex. That's why half the PvZs you see are 2 base all-ins by the Protoss. That's funny. Last major tournament I watched (was MLG maybe? I dunno) every time I saw a Protoss win a macro game it was with a Mothership. Every. Single. Time.
That's the point. The Protoss complaint is that they need to hit a good Vortex to win the late game battle because there is no other counter to Broodlord/Infestor, and that hitting a good Vortex relies on the Zerg making a huge mistake.
This is all off-topic though, so you should make your own thread about it if you want to discuss it. Spoiler: nobody agrees with you.
|
I think the queen discussion is fair game, but the infestor complaints after the Bomber vs Freaky are farfetched. Bomber played a ridiculous playstyle on a terrible map in a game he could have closed out several times had he made some smarter decisions. The infestor is a boring unit for sure, but there's nowhere near enough evidence to suggest massing infestors is viable or OP.
Edit: Oh look, Bomber himself agrees.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
