|
On August 14 2012 01:46 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2012 01:42 ETisME wrote:On August 13 2012 18:19 TheDwf wrote:On August 13 2012 16:11 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:
A terran on 2 bases with 2 OC's is actually ahead (mule income). You're aware that until the Terran player catches up the Zerg's worker count, MULEs only compensate for Zerg's ability to produce drones faster? Sure 45 SCVs + 2 MULEs > 45 drones, but check any old replay featuring a Reactor Hellion expand against a standard 2-bases Zerg play, Terran had 28-29 SCVs by the time Zerg reached ~45 drones @ the 7'30 mark. The key is not Worker count. Terran is fine with zerg staying 2 bases as long as terran itself gets 2 bases up. The reactor hellions hellions were merely to contain the creep and delay the third for as long as possible. The longer the zerg stays on equal bases, the better off the terran is without even needing to kill any workers. It's similar to PvZ where P has to turtle well and try to get a fast third, while zerg either grabs a 4th in respond or go heavy roach ling to kill off that third. And you think Terran being able to actually stop the Zerg from playing retardedly greedy was a bad thing?
zerg staying ahead in one base is not being "retardedly greedy"
You seem to be the kind that says going hatch first is "retardedly greedy" as well...
I would love to hear what is your opinion on Terran going reactor hellion into quick 3 CCs and how zerg should respond to it when hellions are delaying the 3rd..
play from behind after the hellions are cleared by roaches and grab the third later than the terran...
2 bases all in?
|
On August 14 2012 01:58 ETisME wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2012 01:46 Shiori wrote:On August 14 2012 01:42 ETisME wrote:On August 13 2012 18:19 TheDwf wrote:On August 13 2012 16:11 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:
A terran on 2 bases with 2 OC's is actually ahead (mule income). You're aware that until the Terran player catches up the Zerg's worker count, MULEs only compensate for Zerg's ability to produce drones faster? Sure 45 SCVs + 2 MULEs > 45 drones, but check any old replay featuring a Reactor Hellion expand against a standard 2-bases Zerg play, Terran had 28-29 SCVs by the time Zerg reached ~45 drones @ the 7'30 mark. The key is not Worker count. Terran is fine with zerg staying 2 bases as long as terran itself gets 2 bases up. The reactor hellions hellions were merely to contain the creep and delay the third for as long as possible. The longer the zerg stays on equal bases, the better off the terran is without even needing to kill any workers. It's similar to PvZ where P has to turtle well and try to get a fast third, while zerg either grabs a 4th in respond or go heavy roach ling to kill off that third. And you think Terran being able to actually stop the Zerg from playing retardedly greedy was a bad thing? zerg staying ahead in one base is not being "retardedly greedy" You seem to be the kind that says going hatch first is "retardedly greedy" as well... I would love to hear what is your opinion on Terran going reactor hellion into quick 3 CCs and how zerg should respond to it when hellions are delaying the 3rd.. play from behind after the hellions are cleared by roaches and grab the third later than the terran... 2 bases all in?
Oh I dunno, maybe play something like how DRG did when he won his GSL or when he won MLG.
Zerg logic actually makes my brain hurt. You don't need a 3rd base at 5 minutes. I'm sorry, but you just don't.
|
I don't even know what to say to this one. There are many situations where you'd end up needing to engage hellions off creep. Considering before the queen change, 4-6 hellions could stop a zerg from taking a third until muta or roach,, i'd say they're plenty powerful.
You dont' have to make that many roaches to counter 4-6 hellions. And the alternative, which is what we have now, is a free 3rd for the Zerg if you have enough queens? Why do zerg feel entitled to have a free base without really any downside. Yes, you can say that you aren't able to pressure, that Terrans can be super greedy, but it plays to your benefit as Zergs have a much stronger late game. Or you can punish Terrans for being super greedy.
There are many all-ins that "work" vs zerg. Ofc they are all-in so they shouldn't be a guaranteed win. The best all-in vs T that we have is the roach/ling/bane one and that one usually only trades evenly or worse. Considering we more or less have to wait till hive to attack, i think terrans have the advantage on that score.
What on earth is this stuff that terran can be punished for?
This isn't true at all. A roach/ling/bling, fast roaches, bling bust, even making a few more zerglings at the start can punish a really greedy Terran. The problem is that if Terrans want to be greedy, we invest a lot of minerals into OC's and don't really have much for anything else. If you're taking a 3rd base, that's literally your production. As long as you have your appropriate tech structures, and have built up enough larva, if you see the Terran being really greedy, you can easily punish them by making attacking units.
Yes terran has a much harder time remaxing. But you can still buy a lot of time with drops, and your army is very defensively oriented. If i win a big midgame battle as zerg, there is no way i can immediately just roll into your base because bunkers, planetaries, pre-sieged tanks and sim-city will make your army hyper cost-efficient. More often than not, zerg still has to wait for hive before breaking you, giving you a lot of time to come back.
On the other hand, if zerg loses a big fight they are not really strong in a defensive position and it's much easier for terran to take the game then and there.
You can literally have 2-3 spines and a spore at every base and single medivac drops won't even matter to you. And while yes, you're right, if Terrans have a set up already defense, and we lose a large midgame fight, you can't come in and kill us right away. But who cares. Cause you can come kill us soon. Take 1-2 more bases, spread the Terran thin and pressure them so they can't have time to come back.
I don't think that Zerg is an easier race to play necessarily and they do have a lot of unique traits that other races don't but Zerg by nature is pretty damn hard to micro. If you call fungaling, and then fungalling again in a few seconds micro, then you don't even want to see what Terrans have to do to prep for a ball of zerg units running at them. And I like how you're saying you're fungalling so I have less micro to do as that's some gift from the Zerg to the Terran. Funny.
|
On August 14 2012 01:56 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2012 01:53 Shantastic wrote:On August 14 2012 01:28 Shiori wrote:
False. You're cost-efficient with Roach/Ling. The reason you need 3 bases is a production requirement, not a cost requirement. You clearly don't play Zerg if you think this. If I needed 3 bases as a production requirement, 2-base all-ins that snipe the third wouldn't be successful, since the Zerg has a macro hatch. I can efficiently saturate 2 bases in 6 minutes, fully saturate them in 6:30. If I could hold a 2-base all-in with a 2-base economy, Blink 7gates wouldn't be ABLE to snipe the third, and even if they did, I'd have a macro hatch in my main by then, so I wouldn't be behind. But anyone who's seen or played ZvP at even Platinum level knows that if you lose your third to a 2-base all-in, and you don't have Infestors, you've probably lost the game, barring a SERIOUS mistake from the Protoss. Uh, no shit. But that's not what "cost-efficient" means. Do you know what cost-efficient means? It means that your units win FOR COST against some other units. Roach/Ling does this. Just because 2 bases isn't enough to PRODUCE enough Roach/Ling via Larva doesn't mean Roach/Ling isn't cost-efficient.
This'll be my last thing to say about this 'cause A) This is a TvZ thread and B) You're not bothering to read what I'm saying. The reason you avoid losing your third is for income. If it were just for production, I'd be fine off 2 base with a macro hatch.
Cost efficient means that the damage you do is equal to the cost you pay to do it. If Zerg needs more economy to trade evenly, then the units Zerg is using are NOT cost-efficient.
By the way, Zergs can come back from losing their third if they save all their Drones and don't lose units. Stephano has done it to MC on more than one occasion.
You said it yourself. The idea is that you can instantly resaturate once you rebuild your third, minimizing the lost mining time. If Zerg lost drones at the third, that would be an acceptable loss if Zerg were cost-efficient off 2base with 3 hatcheries. But if you lose your third and all the drones there, it's effectively GG.
You can feel free to have last word, but we really shouldn't be having this debate on a TvZ thread.
|
On August 14 2012 02:00 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2012 01:58 ETisME wrote:On August 14 2012 01:46 Shiori wrote:On August 14 2012 01:42 ETisME wrote:On August 13 2012 18:19 TheDwf wrote:On August 13 2012 16:11 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:
A terran on 2 bases with 2 OC's is actually ahead (mule income). You're aware that until the Terran player catches up the Zerg's worker count, MULEs only compensate for Zerg's ability to produce drones faster? Sure 45 SCVs + 2 MULEs > 45 drones, but check any old replay featuring a Reactor Hellion expand against a standard 2-bases Zerg play, Terran had 28-29 SCVs by the time Zerg reached ~45 drones @ the 7'30 mark. The key is not Worker count. Terran is fine with zerg staying 2 bases as long as terran itself gets 2 bases up. The reactor hellions hellions were merely to contain the creep and delay the third for as long as possible. The longer the zerg stays on equal bases, the better off the terran is without even needing to kill any workers. It's similar to PvZ where P has to turtle well and try to get a fast third, while zerg either grabs a 4th in respond or go heavy roach ling to kill off that third. And you think Terran being able to actually stop the Zerg from playing retardedly greedy was a bad thing? zerg staying ahead in one base is not being "retardedly greedy" You seem to be the kind that says going hatch first is "retardedly greedy" as well... I would love to hear what is your opinion on Terran going reactor hellion into quick 3 CCs and how zerg should respond to it when hellions are delaying the 3rd.. play from behind after the hellions are cleared by roaches and grab the third later than the terran... 2 bases all in? Oh I dunno, maybe play something like how DRG did when he won his GSL or when he won MLG. Zerg logic actually makes my brain hurt. You don't need a 3rd base at 5 minutes. I'm sorry, but you just don't.
But if they can't faceroll macro harder than their opponent, they can't win! If only they had a way of scouting the 3rd CC and could formulate a strategy to delay it as well, or even overtake the T for a win...
|
On August 14 2012 01:15 Shantastic wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2012 01:11 Chaggi wrote:On August 14 2012 01:09 Jermstuddog wrote:On August 13 2012 23:46 zmansman17 wrote:On August 13 2012 23:33 Shiori wrote:
You know, when Jermstuddog said that the Marine scales so well with micro and that that's a problem which needs to be nerfed, I actually felt sad. That's one of the only good things in this game. If anything, give other races units similar to the Marine. If you nerf the Marine and take away its micro potential, you get another shitty, boring a-move race. That's not Starcraft. We need more units that amazing players can do magic with. Not more Broodlords or Battlecruisers or Colossi or other uninspired, expensive a-move trash. I agree with this. I think most of us appreciate the beauty of a well-microed platoon of marines. It's a beautiful thing to see when executed by the world's best. I do wish other races had more micro-intensive units like the marine. Because it is precisely these types of units which make starcraft such a great game to watch. They add a way to differentiate skill and they enable a player to be stingy in terms of army, while bolstering their economy. I do want to add, however, that marines are the most over-rated unit in the game. As someone who plays all three races at a high level, I can candidly say that marines are not good passed a certain in-game time. I've always been surprised that more people didn't talk about the crackling, which in my opinion, scales much better throughout the game in either MU and is a potent weapon at any phase of the game. In the end, I Think the new Terran HotS units are a step backwards. Sure we give Terran some nice A-move units, which we need (God knows we don't need more micro-intensive units). However, why not give Protoss and Zerg some more variety and micro-intensive options. Firstly, I never said marine micro needs to be nerfed. Marine micro is an awesome spectacle and should remain so. The problem with marines is if you don't slaughter them, they slaughter you. There is no happy medium. Due to their insane DPS, decent range, incredible movement speed, decent hp and huge synergy with every other terran unit, in particular, other marines and medivacs. Fungal + Blings how are marines really a problem anymore? is this like 2 years ago? what? Conversely: Stim + Splits ZvT midgame is fine. I think the point of debate is Zerg Tier 3, and having to deal with Brood Lords, Infestors, Lings, and Banelings at the same time. Personally, I believe that the metagame just needs to adapt, and Terrans need to find new timings, OR be just as greedy as Zergs and punish super-fast lategame Zerg by going for that dynamic, drop-heavy, high-mobility style of lategame Bio. Back to fundamentals. If he's investing 600 minerals in defense, and another 300 in expanding, you should be investing up to 1k in expanding and teching yourself.
You can't micro a fungal.
|
On August 14 2012 01:22 Chaggi wrote:wait has Taeja been the only Terran to win something in that first page? wow
Indeed out of all those tournaments, Taeja was the only Terran to win on the first page. And he only won two.
|
On August 14 2012 02:07 zmansman17 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2012 01:15 Shantastic wrote:On August 14 2012 01:11 Chaggi wrote:On August 14 2012 01:09 Jermstuddog wrote:On August 13 2012 23:46 zmansman17 wrote:On August 13 2012 23:33 Shiori wrote:
You know, when Jermstuddog said that the Marine scales so well with micro and that that's a problem which needs to be nerfed, I actually felt sad. That's one of the only good things in this game. If anything, give other races units similar to the Marine. If you nerf the Marine and take away its micro potential, you get another shitty, boring a-move race. That's not Starcraft. We need more units that amazing players can do magic with. Not more Broodlords or Battlecruisers or Colossi or other uninspired, expensive a-move trash. I agree with this. I think most of us appreciate the beauty of a well-microed platoon of marines. It's a beautiful thing to see when executed by the world's best. I do wish other races had more micro-intensive units like the marine. Because it is precisely these types of units which make starcraft such a great game to watch. They add a way to differentiate skill and they enable a player to be stingy in terms of army, while bolstering their economy. I do want to add, however, that marines are the most over-rated unit in the game. As someone who plays all three races at a high level, I can candidly say that marines are not good passed a certain in-game time. I've always been surprised that more people didn't talk about the crackling, which in my opinion, scales much better throughout the game in either MU and is a potent weapon at any phase of the game. In the end, I Think the new Terran HotS units are a step backwards. Sure we give Terran some nice A-move units, which we need (God knows we don't need more micro-intensive units). However, why not give Protoss and Zerg some more variety and micro-intensive options. Firstly, I never said marine micro needs to be nerfed. Marine micro is an awesome spectacle and should remain so. The problem with marines is if you don't slaughter them, they slaughter you. There is no happy medium. Due to their insane DPS, decent range, incredible movement speed, decent hp and huge synergy with every other terran unit, in particular, other marines and medivacs. Fungal + Blings how are marines really a problem anymore? is this like 2 years ago? what? Conversely: Stim + Splits ZvT midgame is fine. I think the point of debate is Zerg Tier 3, and having to deal with Brood Lords, Infestors, Lings, and Banelings at the same time. Personally, I believe that the metagame just needs to adapt, and Terrans need to find new timings, OR be just as greedy as Zergs and punish super-fast lategame Zerg by going for that dynamic, drop-heavy, high-mobility style of lategame Bio. Back to fundamentals. If he's investing 600 minerals in defense, and another 300 in expanding, you should be investing up to 1k in expanding and teching yourself. You can't micro a fungal.
The point is not to get caught in a clump. While your army's out on the map, you should be more cautious than that, i.e. splitting your marines before going back to your base to macro, splitting before moving on creep, splitting while on creep, splitting splitting splitting. Unless your enemy has Mutas, in which case on 3base, Zerg won't have Infestors (at least not without creating a huge timing for you to do lots of damage), you lose nothing from keeping marines split as much as possible. If you get caught in a Fungal, it is ultimately because you were careless.
|
On August 14 2012 01:58 ETisME wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2012 01:46 Shiori wrote:On August 14 2012 01:42 ETisME wrote:On August 13 2012 18:19 TheDwf wrote:On August 13 2012 16:11 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:
A terran on 2 bases with 2 OC's is actually ahead (mule income). You're aware that until the Terran player catches up the Zerg's worker count, MULEs only compensate for Zerg's ability to produce drones faster? Sure 45 SCVs + 2 MULEs > 45 drones, but check any old replay featuring a Reactor Hellion expand against a standard 2-bases Zerg play, Terran had 28-29 SCVs by the time Zerg reached ~45 drones @ the 7'30 mark. The key is not Worker count. Terran is fine with zerg staying 2 bases as long as terran itself gets 2 bases up. The reactor hellions hellions were merely to contain the creep and delay the third for as long as possible. The longer the zerg stays on equal bases, the better off the terran is without even needing to kill any workers. It's similar to PvZ where P has to turtle well and try to get a fast third, while zerg either grabs a 4th in respond or go heavy roach ling to kill off that third. And you think Terran being able to actually stop the Zerg from playing retardedly greedy was a bad thing? zerg staying ahead in one base is not being "retardedly greedy" You seem to be the kind that says going hatch first is "retardedly greedy" as well... I would love to hear what is your opinion on Terran going reactor hellion into quick 3 CCs and how zerg should respond to it when hellions are delaying the 3rd.. play from behind after the hellions are cleared by roaches and grab the third later than the terran... 2 bases all in?
The answer to your question is simply queens. As it is to just about every opener in TvZ. Reactor hellion is easily deflected with low apm and low micro with a bunch of queens. The third should also be planted, so you should have enough creep to drop 1-2 spines if heavy reactor hellion (which you should always scout with how fast overlords are).
This is from a 1450 Zerg and 1400 Terran. (Yes, only 1 week of Zerg practice and I was able to get a higher point value than 5 seasons as Terran).
|
On August 14 2012 02:10 Shantastic wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2012 02:07 zmansman17 wrote:On August 14 2012 01:15 Shantastic wrote:On August 14 2012 01:11 Chaggi wrote:On August 14 2012 01:09 Jermstuddog wrote:On August 13 2012 23:46 zmansman17 wrote:On August 13 2012 23:33 Shiori wrote:
You know, when Jermstuddog said that the Marine scales so well with micro and that that's a problem which needs to be nerfed, I actually felt sad. That's one of the only good things in this game. If anything, give other races units similar to the Marine. If you nerf the Marine and take away its micro potential, you get another shitty, boring a-move race. That's not Starcraft. We need more units that amazing players can do magic with. Not more Broodlords or Battlecruisers or Colossi or other uninspired, expensive a-move trash. I agree with this. I think most of us appreciate the beauty of a well-microed platoon of marines. It's a beautiful thing to see when executed by the world's best. I do wish other races had more micro-intensive units like the marine. Because it is precisely these types of units which make starcraft such a great game to watch. They add a way to differentiate skill and they enable a player to be stingy in terms of army, while bolstering their economy. I do want to add, however, that marines are the most over-rated unit in the game. As someone who plays all three races at a high level, I can candidly say that marines are not good passed a certain in-game time. I've always been surprised that more people didn't talk about the crackling, which in my opinion, scales much better throughout the game in either MU and is a potent weapon at any phase of the game. In the end, I Think the new Terran HotS units are a step backwards. Sure we give Terran some nice A-move units, which we need (God knows we don't need more micro-intensive units). However, why not give Protoss and Zerg some more variety and micro-intensive options. Firstly, I never said marine micro needs to be nerfed. Marine micro is an awesome spectacle and should remain so. The problem with marines is if you don't slaughter them, they slaughter you. There is no happy medium. Due to their insane DPS, decent range, incredible movement speed, decent hp and huge synergy with every other terran unit, in particular, other marines and medivacs. Fungal + Blings how are marines really a problem anymore? is this like 2 years ago? what? Conversely: Stim + Splits ZvT midgame is fine. I think the point of debate is Zerg Tier 3, and having to deal with Brood Lords, Infestors, Lings, and Banelings at the same time. Personally, I believe that the metagame just needs to adapt, and Terrans need to find new timings, OR be just as greedy as Zergs and punish super-fast lategame Zerg by going for that dynamic, drop-heavy, high-mobility style of lategame Bio. Back to fundamentals. If he's investing 600 minerals in defense, and another 300 in expanding, you should be investing up to 1k in expanding and teching yourself. You can't micro a fungal. The point is not to get caught in a clump. While your army's out on the map, you should be more cautious than that, i.e. splitting your marines before going back to your base to macro, splitting before moving on creep, splitting while on creep, splitting splitting splitting. Unless your enemy has Mutas, in which case on 3base, Zerg won't have Infestors (at least not without creating a huge timing for you to do lots of damage), you lose nothing from keeping marines split as much as possible. If you get caught in a Fungal, it is ultimately because you were careless.
Zergs response to everything is just "micro better". God, I wish more Zergs had to learn Terran, as I have Zerg to understand how backwards you have it.
|
On August 14 2012 02:10 Shantastic wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2012 02:07 zmansman17 wrote:On August 14 2012 01:15 Shantastic wrote:On August 14 2012 01:11 Chaggi wrote:On August 14 2012 01:09 Jermstuddog wrote:On August 13 2012 23:46 zmansman17 wrote:On August 13 2012 23:33 Shiori wrote:
You know, when Jermstuddog said that the Marine scales so well with micro and that that's a problem which needs to be nerfed, I actually felt sad. That's one of the only good things in this game. If anything, give other races units similar to the Marine. If you nerf the Marine and take away its micro potential, you get another shitty, boring a-move race. That's not Starcraft. We need more units that amazing players can do magic with. Not more Broodlords or Battlecruisers or Colossi or other uninspired, expensive a-move trash. I agree with this. I think most of us appreciate the beauty of a well-microed platoon of marines. It's a beautiful thing to see when executed by the world's best. I do wish other races had more micro-intensive units like the marine. Because it is precisely these types of units which make starcraft such a great game to watch. They add a way to differentiate skill and they enable a player to be stingy in terms of army, while bolstering their economy. I do want to add, however, that marines are the most over-rated unit in the game. As someone who plays all three races at a high level, I can candidly say that marines are not good passed a certain in-game time. I've always been surprised that more people didn't talk about the crackling, which in my opinion, scales much better throughout the game in either MU and is a potent weapon at any phase of the game. In the end, I Think the new Terran HotS units are a step backwards. Sure we give Terran some nice A-move units, which we need (God knows we don't need more micro-intensive units). However, why not give Protoss and Zerg some more variety and micro-intensive options. Firstly, I never said marine micro needs to be nerfed. Marine micro is an awesome spectacle and should remain so. The problem with marines is if you don't slaughter them, they slaughter you. There is no happy medium. Due to their insane DPS, decent range, incredible movement speed, decent hp and huge synergy with every other terran unit, in particular, other marines and medivacs. Fungal + Blings how are marines really a problem anymore? is this like 2 years ago? what? Conversely: Stim + Splits ZvT midgame is fine. I think the point of debate is Zerg Tier 3, and having to deal with Brood Lords, Infestors, Lings, and Banelings at the same time. Personally, I believe that the metagame just needs to adapt, and Terrans need to find new timings, OR be just as greedy as Zergs and punish super-fast lategame Zerg by going for that dynamic, drop-heavy, high-mobility style of lategame Bio. Back to fundamentals. If he's investing 600 minerals in defense, and another 300 in expanding, you should be investing up to 1k in expanding and teching yourself. You can't micro a fungal. The point is not to get caught in a clump. While your army's out on the map, you should be more cautious than that, i.e. splitting your marines before going back to your base to macro, splitting before moving on creep, splitting while on creep, splitting splitting splitting. Unless your enemy has Mutas, in which case on 3base, Zerg won't have Infestors (at least not without creating a huge timing for you to do lots of damage), you lose nothing from keeping marines split as much as possible. If you get caught in a Fungal, it is ultimately because you were careless.
What if I told you the solution to not losing to all-ins/Hellion runbys pre-patch TvZ was to just play better, like DRG said?
|
On August 14 2012 02:14 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2012 02:10 Shantastic wrote:On August 14 2012 02:07 zmansman17 wrote:On August 14 2012 01:15 Shantastic wrote:On August 14 2012 01:11 Chaggi wrote:On August 14 2012 01:09 Jermstuddog wrote:On August 13 2012 23:46 zmansman17 wrote:On August 13 2012 23:33 Shiori wrote:
You know, when Jermstuddog said that the Marine scales so well with micro and that that's a problem which needs to be nerfed, I actually felt sad. That's one of the only good things in this game. If anything, give other races units similar to the Marine. If you nerf the Marine and take away its micro potential, you get another shitty, boring a-move race. That's not Starcraft. We need more units that amazing players can do magic with. Not more Broodlords or Battlecruisers or Colossi or other uninspired, expensive a-move trash. I agree with this. I think most of us appreciate the beauty of a well-microed platoon of marines. It's a beautiful thing to see when executed by the world's best. I do wish other races had more micro-intensive units like the marine. Because it is precisely these types of units which make starcraft such a great game to watch. They add a way to differentiate skill and they enable a player to be stingy in terms of army, while bolstering their economy. I do want to add, however, that marines are the most over-rated unit in the game. As someone who plays all three races at a high level, I can candidly say that marines are not good passed a certain in-game time. I've always been surprised that more people didn't talk about the crackling, which in my opinion, scales much better throughout the game in either MU and is a potent weapon at any phase of the game. In the end, I Think the new Terran HotS units are a step backwards. Sure we give Terran some nice A-move units, which we need (God knows we don't need more micro-intensive units). However, why not give Protoss and Zerg some more variety and micro-intensive options. Firstly, I never said marine micro needs to be nerfed. Marine micro is an awesome spectacle and should remain so. The problem with marines is if you don't slaughter them, they slaughter you. There is no happy medium. Due to their insane DPS, decent range, incredible movement speed, decent hp and huge synergy with every other terran unit, in particular, other marines and medivacs. Fungal + Blings how are marines really a problem anymore? is this like 2 years ago? what? Conversely: Stim + Splits ZvT midgame is fine. I think the point of debate is Zerg Tier 3, and having to deal with Brood Lords, Infestors, Lings, and Banelings at the same time. Personally, I believe that the metagame just needs to adapt, and Terrans need to find new timings, OR be just as greedy as Zergs and punish super-fast lategame Zerg by going for that dynamic, drop-heavy, high-mobility style of lategame Bio. Back to fundamentals. If he's investing 600 minerals in defense, and another 300 in expanding, you should be investing up to 1k in expanding and teching yourself. You can't micro a fungal. The point is not to get caught in a clump. While your army's out on the map, you should be more cautious than that, i.e. splitting your marines before going back to your base to macro, splitting before moving on creep, splitting while on creep, splitting splitting splitting. Unless your enemy has Mutas, in which case on 3base, Zerg won't have Infestors (at least not without creating a huge timing for you to do lots of damage), you lose nothing from keeping marines split as much as possible. If you get caught in a Fungal, it is ultimately because you were careless. What if I told you the solution to not losing to all-ins/Hellion runbys pre-patch TvZ was to just play better, like DRG said?
it's not even play better, it's like if Terrans don't have bunkers against a 4gate. it's just something you need to do and zergs that don't do it can lose
|
On August 14 2012 02:13 zmansman17 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2012 02:10 Shantastic wrote:On August 14 2012 02:07 zmansman17 wrote:On August 14 2012 01:15 Shantastic wrote:On August 14 2012 01:11 Chaggi wrote:On August 14 2012 01:09 Jermstuddog wrote:On August 13 2012 23:46 zmansman17 wrote:On August 13 2012 23:33 Shiori wrote:
You know, when Jermstuddog said that the Marine scales so well with micro and that that's a problem which needs to be nerfed, I actually felt sad. That's one of the only good things in this game. If anything, give other races units similar to the Marine. If you nerf the Marine and take away its micro potential, you get another shitty, boring a-move race. That's not Starcraft. We need more units that amazing players can do magic with. Not more Broodlords or Battlecruisers or Colossi or other uninspired, expensive a-move trash. I agree with this. I think most of us appreciate the beauty of a well-microed platoon of marines. It's a beautiful thing to see when executed by the world's best. I do wish other races had more micro-intensive units like the marine. Because it is precisely these types of units which make starcraft such a great game to watch. They add a way to differentiate skill and they enable a player to be stingy in terms of army, while bolstering their economy. I do want to add, however, that marines are the most over-rated unit in the game. As someone who plays all three races at a high level, I can candidly say that marines are not good passed a certain in-game time. I've always been surprised that more people didn't talk about the crackling, which in my opinion, scales much better throughout the game in either MU and is a potent weapon at any phase of the game. In the end, I Think the new Terran HotS units are a step backwards. Sure we give Terran some nice A-move units, which we need (God knows we don't need more micro-intensive units). However, why not give Protoss and Zerg some more variety and micro-intensive options. Firstly, I never said marine micro needs to be nerfed. Marine micro is an awesome spectacle and should remain so. The problem with marines is if you don't slaughter them, they slaughter you. There is no happy medium. Due to their insane DPS, decent range, incredible movement speed, decent hp and huge synergy with every other terran unit, in particular, other marines and medivacs. Fungal + Blings how are marines really a problem anymore? is this like 2 years ago? what? Conversely: Stim + Splits ZvT midgame is fine. I think the point of debate is Zerg Tier 3, and having to deal with Brood Lords, Infestors, Lings, and Banelings at the same time. Personally, I believe that the metagame just needs to adapt, and Terrans need to find new timings, OR be just as greedy as Zergs and punish super-fast lategame Zerg by going for that dynamic, drop-heavy, high-mobility style of lategame Bio. Back to fundamentals. If he's investing 600 minerals in defense, and another 300 in expanding, you should be investing up to 1k in expanding and teching yourself. You can't micro a fungal. The point is not to get caught in a clump. While your army's out on the map, you should be more cautious than that, i.e. splitting your marines before going back to your base to macro, splitting before moving on creep, splitting while on creep, splitting splitting splitting. Unless your enemy has Mutas, in which case on 3base, Zerg won't have Infestors (at least not without creating a huge timing for you to do lots of damage), you lose nothing from keeping marines split as much as possible. If you get caught in a Fungal, it is ultimately because you were careless. Zergs response to everything is just "micro better". God, I wish more Zergs had to learn Terran, as I have Zerg to understand how backwards you have it.
I'm not a Zerg at all when it comes to balance, nor have I really ever been. I just don't like excessive balance QQ. I didn't like the extreme changes like the Queen buff or the Ghost nerf or the Neural Parasite nerf, because they were all because of impulsive QQ in reaction to a strategy that took anywhere from 1-6 months to innovate. But Terran is the micro race. The things you can achieve with marines are insanely sick, and if Zerglings had that high a skill cap, you could have removed Infestors from the frigging game. So yeah, if you're a Terran, micro better. If you're a Zerg, macro better and make better decisions. Adapting takes time. QQing doesn't.
|
On August 14 2012 02:11 zmansman17 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2012 01:58 ETisME wrote:On August 14 2012 01:46 Shiori wrote:On August 14 2012 01:42 ETisME wrote:On August 13 2012 18:19 TheDwf wrote:On August 13 2012 16:11 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:
A terran on 2 bases with 2 OC's is actually ahead (mule income). You're aware that until the Terran player catches up the Zerg's worker count, MULEs only compensate for Zerg's ability to produce drones faster? Sure 45 SCVs + 2 MULEs > 45 drones, but check any old replay featuring a Reactor Hellion expand against a standard 2-bases Zerg play, Terran had 28-29 SCVs by the time Zerg reached ~45 drones @ the 7'30 mark. The key is not Worker count. Terran is fine with zerg staying 2 bases as long as terran itself gets 2 bases up. The reactor hellions hellions were merely to contain the creep and delay the third for as long as possible. The longer the zerg stays on equal bases, the better off the terran is without even needing to kill any workers. It's similar to PvZ where P has to turtle well and try to get a fast third, while zerg either grabs a 4th in respond or go heavy roach ling to kill off that third. And you think Terran being able to actually stop the Zerg from playing retardedly greedy was a bad thing? zerg staying ahead in one base is not being "retardedly greedy" You seem to be the kind that says going hatch first is "retardedly greedy" as well... I would love to hear what is your opinion on Terran going reactor hellion into quick 3 CCs and how zerg should respond to it when hellions are delaying the 3rd.. play from behind after the hellions are cleared by roaches and grab the third later than the terran... 2 bases all in? The answer to your question is simply queens. As it is to just about every opener in TvZ. Reactor hellion is easily deflected with low apm and low micro with a bunch of queens. The third should also be planted, so you should have enough creep to drop 1-2 spines if heavy reactor hellion (which you should always scout with how fast overlords are). This is from a 1450 Zerg and 1400 Terran. (Yes, only 1 week of Zerg practice and I was able to get a higher point value than 5 seasons as Terran).
You should play protoss too and then we could just state you are "really good at Starcraft 2" and be done with "this race is easiest" arguments.
After Taeja's crazy run through IPL, I have been looking into what he does differently that most terrans. His style of building up OCCs and M.U.L.E.s during the entire match up is very compelling. Some terrans would go mass CC after they max out on untis, but Taeja builds them up over time and keeps his over all SCV count low. This avoids the awkward transition to that "super max" army terran gets when they sack SCVs and gives him more M.U.L.E.s. Plus, he can use PFs to secure expansions and mules to mine at the most exposed ones.
A lot of people are saying it is all micro that makes Taeja so good. Beyond the micro, his decision making and style is more fluid that most terran builds. Also, he goes back to the old terran standby, abuse the shit out of the M.U.L.E.
|
On August 14 2012 02:14 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2012 02:10 Shantastic wrote:On August 14 2012 02:07 zmansman17 wrote:On August 14 2012 01:15 Shantastic wrote:On August 14 2012 01:11 Chaggi wrote:On August 14 2012 01:09 Jermstuddog wrote:On August 13 2012 23:46 zmansman17 wrote:On August 13 2012 23:33 Shiori wrote:
You know, when Jermstuddog said that the Marine scales so well with micro and that that's a problem which needs to be nerfed, I actually felt sad. That's one of the only good things in this game. If anything, give other races units similar to the Marine. If you nerf the Marine and take away its micro potential, you get another shitty, boring a-move race. That's not Starcraft. We need more units that amazing players can do magic with. Not more Broodlords or Battlecruisers or Colossi or other uninspired, expensive a-move trash. I agree with this. I think most of us appreciate the beauty of a well-microed platoon of marines. It's a beautiful thing to see when executed by the world's best. I do wish other races had more micro-intensive units like the marine. Because it is precisely these types of units which make starcraft such a great game to watch. They add a way to differentiate skill and they enable a player to be stingy in terms of army, while bolstering their economy. I do want to add, however, that marines are the most over-rated unit in the game. As someone who plays all three races at a high level, I can candidly say that marines are not good passed a certain in-game time. I've always been surprised that more people didn't talk about the crackling, which in my opinion, scales much better throughout the game in either MU and is a potent weapon at any phase of the game. In the end, I Think the new Terran HotS units are a step backwards. Sure we give Terran some nice A-move units, which we need (God knows we don't need more micro-intensive units). However, why not give Protoss and Zerg some more variety and micro-intensive options. Firstly, I never said marine micro needs to be nerfed. Marine micro is an awesome spectacle and should remain so. The problem with marines is if you don't slaughter them, they slaughter you. There is no happy medium. Due to their insane DPS, decent range, incredible movement speed, decent hp and huge synergy with every other terran unit, in particular, other marines and medivacs. Fungal + Blings how are marines really a problem anymore? is this like 2 years ago? what? Conversely: Stim + Splits ZvT midgame is fine. I think the point of debate is Zerg Tier 3, and having to deal with Brood Lords, Infestors, Lings, and Banelings at the same time. Personally, I believe that the metagame just needs to adapt, and Terrans need to find new timings, OR be just as greedy as Zergs and punish super-fast lategame Zerg by going for that dynamic, drop-heavy, high-mobility style of lategame Bio. Back to fundamentals. If he's investing 600 minerals in defense, and another 300 in expanding, you should be investing up to 1k in expanding and teching yourself. You can't micro a fungal. The point is not to get caught in a clump. While your army's out on the map, you should be more cautious than that, i.e. splitting your marines before going back to your base to macro, splitting before moving on creep, splitting while on creep, splitting splitting splitting. Unless your enemy has Mutas, in which case on 3base, Zerg won't have Infestors (at least not without creating a huge timing for you to do lots of damage), you lose nothing from keeping marines split as much as possible. If you get caught in a Fungal, it is ultimately because you were careless. What if I told you the solution to not losing to all-ins/Hellion runbys pre-patch TvZ was to just play better, like DRG said?
That was what I was doing with my ZvT. The patch made it easier for me, but I never asked for it. I tried new things, and when I lost, I raged, but I never seriously asked for a balance change, especially not with Hellions.
|
On August 14 2012 02:11 zmansman17 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2012 01:58 ETisME wrote:On August 14 2012 01:46 Shiori wrote:On August 14 2012 01:42 ETisME wrote:On August 13 2012 18:19 TheDwf wrote:On August 13 2012 16:11 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:
A terran on 2 bases with 2 OC's is actually ahead (mule income). You're aware that until the Terran player catches up the Zerg's worker count, MULEs only compensate for Zerg's ability to produce drones faster? Sure 45 SCVs + 2 MULEs > 45 drones, but check any old replay featuring a Reactor Hellion expand against a standard 2-bases Zerg play, Terran had 28-29 SCVs by the time Zerg reached ~45 drones @ the 7'30 mark. The key is not Worker count. Terran is fine with zerg staying 2 bases as long as terran itself gets 2 bases up. The reactor hellions hellions were merely to contain the creep and delay the third for as long as possible. The longer the zerg stays on equal bases, the better off the terran is without even needing to kill any workers. It's similar to PvZ where P has to turtle well and try to get a fast third, while zerg either grabs a 4th in respond or go heavy roach ling to kill off that third. And you think Terran being able to actually stop the Zerg from playing retardedly greedy was a bad thing? zerg staying ahead in one base is not being "retardedly greedy" You seem to be the kind that says going hatch first is "retardedly greedy" as well... I would love to hear what is your opinion on Terran going reactor hellion into quick 3 CCs and how zerg should respond to it when hellions are delaying the 3rd.. play from behind after the hellions are cleared by roaches and grab the third later than the terran... 2 bases all in? The answer to your question is simply queens. As it is to just about every opener in TvZ. Reactor hellion is easily deflected with low apm and low micro with a bunch of queens. The third should also be planted, so you should have enough creep to drop 1-2 spines if heavy reactor hellion (which you should always scout with how fast overlords are). This is from a 1450 Zerg and 1400 Terran. (Yes, only 1 week of Zerg practice and I was able to get a higher point value than 5 seasons as Terran).
we were talking about pre queen buff patch here.
hence the reactor hellion opening.
and honestly, I don't really care about how many points you have. I only watch Pro zerg streams, mostly koreans because of my time zone.
your 1 week of Zerg practice benefitted from your 5 seasons of Terran. Just like my toss caught up with my main zerg account in 2 weeks. Or just like how Losira can beat korean GMs with his toss.
|
On August 14 2012 02:27 ETisME wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2012 02:11 zmansman17 wrote:On August 14 2012 01:58 ETisME wrote:On August 14 2012 01:46 Shiori wrote:On August 14 2012 01:42 ETisME wrote:On August 13 2012 18:19 TheDwf wrote:On August 13 2012 16:11 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:
A terran on 2 bases with 2 OC's is actually ahead (mule income). You're aware that until the Terran player catches up the Zerg's worker count, MULEs only compensate for Zerg's ability to produce drones faster? Sure 45 SCVs + 2 MULEs > 45 drones, but check any old replay featuring a Reactor Hellion expand against a standard 2-bases Zerg play, Terran had 28-29 SCVs by the time Zerg reached ~45 drones @ the 7'30 mark. The key is not Worker count. Terran is fine with zerg staying 2 bases as long as terran itself gets 2 bases up. The reactor hellions hellions were merely to contain the creep and delay the third for as long as possible. The longer the zerg stays on equal bases, the better off the terran is without even needing to kill any workers. It's similar to PvZ where P has to turtle well and try to get a fast third, while zerg either grabs a 4th in respond or go heavy roach ling to kill off that third. And you think Terran being able to actually stop the Zerg from playing retardedly greedy was a bad thing? zerg staying ahead in one base is not being "retardedly greedy" You seem to be the kind that says going hatch first is "retardedly greedy" as well... I would love to hear what is your opinion on Terran going reactor hellion into quick 3 CCs and how zerg should respond to it when hellions are delaying the 3rd.. play from behind after the hellions are cleared by roaches and grab the third later than the terran... 2 bases all in? The answer to your question is simply queens. As it is to just about every opener in TvZ. Reactor hellion is easily deflected with low apm and low micro with a bunch of queens. The third should also be planted, so you should have enough creep to drop 1-2 spines if heavy reactor hellion (which you should always scout with how fast overlords are). This is from a 1450 Zerg and 1400 Terran. (Yes, only 1 week of Zerg practice and I was able to get a higher point value than 5 seasons as Terran). we were talking about pre queen buff patch here. hence the reactor hellion opening. and honestly, I don't really care about how many points you have. I only watch Pro zerg streams, mostly koreans because of my time zone. your 1 week of Zerg practice benefitted from your 5 seasons of Terran. Just like my toss caught up with my main zerg account in 2 weeks. Or just like how Losira can beat korean GMs with his toss.
Does anybody offrace as Terran?
|
On August 14 2012 01:58 ETisME wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2012 01:46 Shiori wrote:On August 14 2012 01:42 ETisME wrote:On August 13 2012 18:19 TheDwf wrote:On August 13 2012 16:11 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:
A terran on 2 bases with 2 OC's is actually ahead (mule income). You're aware that until the Terran player catches up the Zerg's worker count, MULEs only compensate for Zerg's ability to produce drones faster? Sure 45 SCVs + 2 MULEs > 45 drones, but check any old replay featuring a Reactor Hellion expand against a standard 2-bases Zerg play, Terran had 28-29 SCVs by the time Zerg reached ~45 drones @ the 7'30 mark. The key is not Worker count. Terran is fine with zerg staying 2 bases as long as terran itself gets 2 bases up. The reactor hellions hellions were merely to contain the creep and delay the third for as long as possible. The longer the zerg stays on equal bases, the better off the terran is without even needing to kill any workers. It's similar to PvZ where P has to turtle well and try to get a fast third, while zerg either grabs a 4th in respond or go heavy roach ling to kill off that third. And you think Terran being able to actually stop the Zerg from playing retardedly greedy was a bad thing? zerg staying ahead in one base is not being "retardedly greedy" You seem to be the kind that says going hatch first is "retardedly greedy" as well... I would love to hear what is your opinion on Terran going reactor hellion into quick 3 CCs and how zerg should respond to it when hellions are delaying the 3rd.. play from behind after the hellions are cleared by roaches and grab the third later than the terran... 2 bases all in?
3 bases before you make anything but four lings is the definition of greed. The fact that zerg can get away with it and it is considered standard play speaks volume of the game and the race in and of itself.
|
Zerg's wouldn't have had issues with Hellions if they placed spines or hell, instead of SDDD every round of larvae, and make some units. I hear a surround of Lings on Hellions is pretty good?
Last time I checked, 3rd's that have rocks piss off Zerg. God-for-effn-bid Zerg has to make units other than drones
Last I checked, SDDD is allowed for up to 8 mins uncontested. Last I checked, Zerg Bane/Ling/Roach all-in's every TvZ. And IF that fails they skip the mid game and go straight into the late game. Because last I checked, Zergs can take their 3rd EZPZ lemon-squeezie and not have to worry about harassment (thanks Blizzard) so they have banked enough to go straight into Winfestors and then sit back and defend any aggression until BL/Corruptors. Ofc, that was the last time I checked. But I guess lately, Zerg's have been trying Ultra's more because they know Terran cannot just tech switch from Marines into Marauders.
And its not like Zerg has to worry about Ghosts anymore since they are only made in PvT, maybe.
OL speed is great too. Now Zerg can see every Terran opening! You know, like gas. That's a huge tell tale sign of what's going on. But of course, Terran being sneaky could risk/force Zerg to make Lings!
|
On August 14 2012 01:40 lorestarcraft wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2012 22:22 Jermstuddog wrote:On August 13 2012 22:16 Chaggi wrote:On August 13 2012 22:03 Jermstuddog wrote:On August 13 2012 21:50 Dalavita wrote:On August 13 2012 21:40 Jermstuddog wrote:On August 13 2012 21:31 Dalavita wrote:
Random TvZs are conclusive evidence of balance. You heard it here first. Made up numbers are even better. Sorry for basing my facts on actual games played. You should be sorry for using random TvZs with random occurences and at random skill levels as an example of TvZs in general. I haven't said anything good about made up numbers either, so you should be sorry for making that accusation as well. Sorry for using top master level, knowing that the difference between my play and a GMs play is they take more calculated risks than I do? Ok... first pro ZvT rep on sc2rep dKiller vs FXOTree: 7:30 Terran has 32 SCVs, 3 orbitals and 2 MULE's for a total of: 1400/224 Zerg has 29 drones 2 hatches for a total of: 860/336 Zerg and Terran are actually fighting in the early game, so this isn't a good argument for macro potential. Also, T fucks up and lets Zerg all the way into his main killing his own income for the next major portion of the game. Next game down the list Mill.Tarson vs AcerBly 7:30 T: 36+2 Mules - 1480/224 Z: 47 - 1240/432 9:30 T: 47+0 Mules - 1120/464 Z: 43 - 1240/432 Point to any pro level rep you want, because apparently top of masters isn't good enough. It's always the same, always has been. Zerg econ struggles in the early game. This is why Terrans find themselves not knowing wtf to do now. They've been beating up on the fat kid for 2 years. Now that Terran can't bully Zerg around BEFORE they get on equal income, Terran feels behind. Little do they realize, they've always been way ahead. this is stupid. you don't post any replays, and you try to make a direct comparison without telling any situation of what might've happened. why would there be only 4 drones made between 7:30 and 9:30, literally nothing said about this. Because 4 queens can't protect the entire Zerg base once Terran starts getting a decent amount of units out, so Zerg has to make units themselves. Unlike the other two races, Zerg has to pick between drones and combat units. That being said, It's still usually more in the range of 8-10, but this is also the time where Zerg builds most of their infrastructure. Evo chambers, extractors, hatcheries, spire, infestation pit, bling nest all cost drones. So you see Zerg rush up to the mid 40s and stay there because... you know... they like to have the ability to fight back when pressure comes. PS: It's actually 4 drones lost. And I added links to the post since going to the site and looking at the first available ZvT is too hard. While I don't disagree with most of your post, the idea that Zerg have to choose between drones and combat units while the other races do not is baffling. Last I knew, hatchery had more than 1 larva, and queens could add even more larva! So you can effectively make drones and units at the same time! What a concept....
This. Zergs like the facade of having to make units being "economic damage", but for every given hatchery you could dedicate 2 larva to drones every cycle (4 workers per cycle as early as natural hatch completes) and still vastly outproduce anyone else with cost-efficient units to boot while simultaneously having more workers.
Zergs simply think they're entitled to 70 workers by 7 minutes when they're not.
On August 13 2012 21:40 Zrana wrote:Getting caught with tanks unsieged is like the most basic mistake a terran can make.
Less of a Terran "mistake" and more a Zerg free privilege. Speedlings have 4.9 movement speed on creep, and creep takes a minute to recede. If you're on creep you're going to get surrounded.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
