|
On April 20 2011 12:31 Severedevil wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2011 06:15 Ezekyle wrote:On April 20 2011 05:40 TheResidentEvil wrote:On April 20 2011 04:34 jhsu98 wrote:On April 20 2011 01:54 TheResidentEvil wrote: protoss use their strongest units and zerg dont. Pretty easy to see how this got one sided. I mean people complain about the Void Ray/ Colo and its the Toss STRONGEST units. The issue here is that protoss can turtle while they slowly amass their "best units" while zerg couldn't do that. Try rushing to broodlord/infestor on 2-3 bases as zerg and see what happens. It's the scaling as you build your armies, zerg has to react to the potential of a 3-4 gate pressure, then 5-6 gate pressure, then air harass, dt tech so we're building our lower tier units and what happens? the protoss can either "shark mode" as inControl puts it or even just sit and turtle. Zerg options? Keep the units and try to engage eventually with them while teching/expanding or throw the units at the protoss via harassment. But it's so easy for the protoss to defend while taking minimal losses. Every unit the protoss gets along the way (sentries, then stalkers/void ray/colossus in any order) contributes immediately to their army AND adds to their deathball. this is borderline theorycrafting. I can make up stuff too. Zerg can baneling bust, 6 pool, roach rush, nydus all kinds of stuff. Don't say every unit the protoss has and say you have to worry about them. Every unit you kill as zerg takes away from the toss death ball. That is absolutely not theorycrafting, it's what happens every single game. Zerg have shitty scouting Zerg have the fastest, cheapest ground unit in the game, which can turn invisible while stationary. This provides a shitload of scouting. Zerg have the cheapest flying unit in the game. This provides a shitload of scouting. You, not the Zerg, are holding you back. Zerglings and overlords are indeed good at scouting, you're quite correct. The problem is that it's pathetically easy to negate that scouting. Zerglings can only see what your opponent lets them see. Anything out on the map they'll spot quickly, sure. But anything inside your opponent's base? Not a chance. Overlords are the same. Sure, you can suicide them into the enemy base, but they're slow as fuck. Unless your opponent is bad, they'll be shot down before they see anything other than a few pylons or supply depots. Yes, overlord speed will help with that, but overlord speed comes out stupidly slowly. Lair tech takes forever. Imagine if all your tech structures took as long as a Dark Shrine to build. Any sort of timing attack will have already hit by the time overlord speed (or burrow, for that matter) is finished.
The problem with Zerg scouting is that, if your opponent actively tries to block your scouting attempts, they will 100% succeed. If IdrA he says that "no amount of creativity will get a zergling past a wall or an overlord past a marine", he's probably right. He gets a huge amount of flak for refusing to adapt and doing the same thing every game, but anyone who's watched him stream or, indeed, paid any sort of attention to him rather than just reading what his detractors say will know that he doesn't do these things because he's tried them many, many times and they simply don't work. How many Zerg pros have ever said that their scouting is perfectly fine and they can see cheeses and timing pushes coming fairly often? None that I've seen. How many have said the exact opposite? Pretty much every pro who's ever been asked about the game's balance. And almost no Terran or Protoss players have ever complained that they can't see anything coming. There's a reason for that, and it's not that every Zerg player in the world is a whiny little bitch who never tries anything other than roach/hydra and 1a.
|
On April 20 2011 16:28 Malpractice.248 wrote: ^ 2) Opportunity skill is there for Z. Baneling drops, fungal drops, Burrow micro (much like blink), NP, multiprong fighting (were the BEST at pushing multiple areas at once, given how durable/good roaches are, and all the tools we have early)
Not to mention contaminate, nydus worms, burrowed banelings.
Theres opportunity for micro, just maybe not int he terms YOU see it (blink, ff, stim)
In the main phases of the game, drops require an investment and timing that Zergs find it difficult to afford, or plan towards, because they are mostly waiting for the opponent's initiative. If drops were easier available, I would completely agree. The same goes for nydus worms.
Both P and T have too many tools available to counter burrow micro. As for burrowing hurt units, Zerg battle math requires numbers, and it is usually better to let a unit die. Zerg units have a low attack rate, which make them easier to micro against, and Terran units have high attack rates, which means it is harder to micro against them.
The reason why blink, ff, stim, slow (marauder), drops, high movement speed, big range, high attack speed, have a strong refinement potential, is simply because these are among the ultimate abilities in RTSing. If you watched some WC3, these abilities are basically what RTS micro is built around, and Zerg have poor access to all of these.
|
On April 20 2011 05:23 Dalavita wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2011 21:22 hugman wrote:On April 19 2011 20:58 Severedevil wrote:Spine Crawlers, Infestors, and Broodlords all have superior range to the Lurker. Do any of those units hold off aggressive low-tech midgame pushes? Yes.
No they don't. Infestors are limited to their energy; Broodlords are T3.
On April 20 2011 05:23 Dalavita wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2011 21:24 partysnatcher wrote: 1) Zerg is more difficult to just play "normally" - this is a fact, and few people will deny this. 2) When SC2 was refined to require less APM, a lot of fast, skilled players looked towards Z because they thought they would get more out of their fast fingers with Zerg. 3) Most people I know that were high level in other games, now play Zerg. Ie - better, higher quality RTS players have picked Zerg. 4) It is a common experience for Zergs on ladder to play harder, sneakier and more tactical than their opponents, and lose to simple, mindless, cookie-cutter builds by P and T. 5) Most intelligent commentators and people with insight in SC2, are Zerg players.
We have some awesome Ts and Ps out there, by all means, but most Zergs are playing on "very hard"-mode. Zergs have tried to master the game on "very hard" mode for almost a year now, and are of course in the face of repeated defeat, much better trained than most Ts and Ps.
Based on player skill alone, Zerg should be the dominating race as it was in the early / mid beta. 1. No it's not. It's a delusion of grandeur coming from zerg players. 2. I'd argue Terran requires the highest APM at the absolute top level. 3. Pointless and subjective. Nada and Boxer play Terran, MC plays Protoss. Doesn't mean a single thing. 4. Also untrue. In fact, the most common thing for zergs to do on ladder is just to pump out drones and have no units and thus die to an attack (or baneling bust). 5. What the hell is this, is this an actual argument? Your entire post is so biased that it's actually disgusting.
1. So according to you, it's easy for Zerg to play laid back macro while being safe from all the different early aggression and cheese that a Terran or Protoss can do, but it's hard for a Protoss to just sit on 3 bases with FFs and cannons and mass up a deathball? Give me a fucking break.
I'm not gonna argue with rest of his points since they are stupid as hell and, as you said, pointless. But the fact remains, almost every pro Zerg has complained about Zerg being UP one way or another, while Boxer is basically only Terran who's ever complained his race, and that was way back when Fruitdealer was somehow considered the top player in the world. There was never a time when Zerg was considered "strong" except when Roaches got a range buff. Zerg has been consistently underrepresented at top levels since the game's release and if anyone's delusional, it's you.
|
On April 19 2011 17:05 Disarm22 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2011 16:59 AzureD wrote: People keep saying the 200 food Toss army is stronger than the 200 food Zerg army but this seems like an assumption to me. To me it is more like Zerg has problems getting the 200 food army that can beat the 200 food Toss army.
I am pretty sure I can come up with a mix of Zerg units that will beat any mix of Toss units at 200 food.
My prediction is that harassment style play while teching will become the way to fight Protoss deathballs. LMAO, im guessing you play toss, when you figure out the unstoppable 200 food zerg army, pls promise me, you'll make a post and solve all our zerg troubles.
I actually play Zerg these days. Against Toss that let me macro who just sit back and build their army to 200 food I beat pretty easily. Let me give you an example.
This is the Toss composition. Colossus, Void Ray, Stalker, Sentry that gets reinforced by Zealot warp in.
This gets crushed by Ultra, Infestor, Hydra with maybe 50 food army left over in favor of Zerg. If instead it is more Zealot heavy it gets smashed by Ultra + Baneling + Infestor.
Although at all times the Infestors are the most critical units as they have the power to change your army requirements on demand. They have AA capability, AoE attack, the ability to stop kiting, the ability to break FF, the ability to have certain enemy units fight for you, the ability to pull enemy units away from their ball, and the ability to harass in multiple ways.
Other things I learned form using the Infestor a lot is that the unit becomes more effective in armies that do damage rapidly so NP works better with Zerglings, Hydra, Ultra, or Banelings. While NP does not work well with Roach, Muta, Corruptor, or Broodlord. Same deal with Fungal. Works well when you can kill in the time frame of a Fungal. For example a Fungaled Stalker will die in 3 hits from an Ultralisk or about 2 seconds.
Yes these Zerg death balls are high on gas and not easy to get in a timely manner but that's part of the process. Most of the most dangerous Toss death balls are also high on gas and I am going to have more expansions that him which are actually there mostly for the gas.
Having 5 expansions is not very effective when it comes to minerals but they are effective when it comes to gas as the first thing I grab on my 4th and 5th expansions are the gas.
Also at high economy Nydus play does work when you can replace Nydus worms faster than his warp cool down because that is the most mobile part of his defense.
|
On April 20 2011 17:42 AzureD wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2011 17:05 Disarm22 wrote:On April 19 2011 16:59 AzureD wrote: People keep saying the 200 food Toss army is stronger than the 200 food Zerg army but this seems like an assumption to me. To me it is more like Zerg has problems getting the 200 food army that can beat the 200 food Toss army.
I am pretty sure I can come up with a mix of Zerg units that will beat any mix of Toss units at 200 food.
My prediction is that harassment style play while teching will become the way to fight Protoss deathballs. LMAO, im guessing you play toss, when you figure out the unstoppable 200 food zerg army, pls promise me, you'll make a post and solve all our zerg troubles. I actually play Zerg these days. Against Toss that let me macro who just sit back and build their army to 200 food I beat pretty easily. Let me give you an example. This is the Toss composition. Colossus, Void Ray, Stalker, Sentry that gets reinforced by Zealot warp in. This gets crushed by Ultra, Infestor, Hydra with maybe 50 food army left over in favor of Zerg. If instead it is more Zealot heavy it gets smashed by Ultra + Baneling + Infestor. Although at all times the Infestors are the most critical units as they have the power to change your army requirements on demand. They have AA capability, AoE attack, the ability to stop kiting, the ability to break FF, the ability to have certain enemy units fight for you, the ability to pull enemy units away from their ball, and the ability to harass in multiple ways. Other things I learned form using the Infestor a lot is that the unit becomes more effective in armies that do damage rapidly so NP works better with Zerglings, Hydra, Ultra, or Banelings. While NP does not work well with Roach, Muta, Corruptor, or Broodlord. Same deal with Fungal. Works well when you can kill in the time frame of a Fungal. For example a Fungaled Stalker will die in 3 hits from an Ultralisk or about 2 seconds. Yes these Zerg death balls are high on gas and not easy to get in a timely manner but that's part of the process. Most of the most dangerous Toss death balls are also high on gas and I am going to have more expansions that him which are actually there mostly for the gas. Having 5 expansions is not very effective when it comes to minerals but they are effective when it comes to gas as the first thing I grab on my 4th and 5th expansions are the gas. Also at high economy Nydus play does work when you can replace Nydus worms faster than his warp cool down because that is the most mobile part of his defense.
I was testing some unit compositions with a friend yesterday and also found that Ultra/Hydra/Infestor is one of the few cost effective ways of beating Colossus/Voidray/Stalker. (We both had 120 supply army and realistic upgrades)
|
On April 20 2011 12:37 Elefanto wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2011 08:12 WhiteDog wrote:
Even the last "original" play, like mondragon or spanishiwa, are all MADE to compensate that weakness: spanishiwa just mass spine and queen so that he can tech up without having to make a shitload of roach/hydra or ling/baneling and keep all his gaz to tech, but to do that he just cripple his agressive capacities early game (and in my opinion it's a shitty "style" that should not work). Mondragon on the other side just counter that by being very agressive with the most cost efficient unit the zerg have: the roach (you know, if you don't want to defend, just play agressive). But zerg is also shitty to play agressive: we have no units with high range high speed that are great to harass (we have one high range and slow, one fast and low range).
That's the right attitude by dismissing other styles and saying shit is broken and needs to be patched. Maybe that's the reason zergs aren't really doing progress. Players that are pursuing their own ZvP style (spanishiwa / mondragon / sheth) seem to do quite well in that matchup. I'm sorry, I was not intending to say that their style was bad or unskill at all, that's the opposite, mondragon is awesome and spanishiwa too. (I edited because the word are harsh for such a good player as spanishiwa) But when i say that spanishiwa's style is "shit", what I mean is that making a shitload of spine and queen and just decide to let down any kind of early agressive play by sitting back is not what zerg "should" be, it's a style that I don't want to play because it did not match my playstyle at all: you just let go the first half of the game and the opponent CAN abuse it.
About mondragon's playstyle, playing agressive is so good and goddamn impressive, but : it ask for a damn good mechanics, and still, as I said, zerg early agression is weak because we do not have that fast / high range unit that can take down canon. Roach, with 4 range attack, are hella bad against canon and wall in (our agression is not cost effective in the end). July playstyle is most likely the same but more ling/bling focussed and more all-inish. By the way, I do pretty good against protoss, but sometime I get roflstomped by a weird timing attack that I had not prepared for, and preparing for it mean letting something else go: delaying your tech (in a way that if the protoss step back and death ball it up you're dead) or just letting go any kind of early agressive play, so that. Protoss player just don't seems to understand that yet, and don't abuse it.
I will have a bold statement: in protoss vs zerg, the most undiscovered race is the protoss.
Show nested quote +On April 20 2011 08:12 WhiteDog wrote: But here is the problem about zerg, and the problem in ZvP in my opinion. Zerg are weak to scout until overlord speed, so we can just guess and act on the guess that we have AND the zerg have NO DEFENSIVE UNIT. There is no, NOT ONE, unit that help zerg defend cost efficiently. The lurker is no more, so the only way to defend is to OUTMUSCLE your opponent: you need to build a shitload of unit.
Queens and Spines are efficient defensive units, available very early in the game. Exactly, Queens and spines. But when you build them, you just let go any kind of early agression: why does the protoss just don't abuse that by expanding a lot ? They did not have figured it out yet. The future of ZvP will more about be denying scout, abusing weird timing attack or death ball it up in a way that zerg will have to prepare to counter everything and, in the end, just die because of the lack of tech unit / good enough economy.
All in all, ZvP will not be balanced until the next expansion, because what zerg needs is a new unit with a very cost efficient defensive power like the lurker. If you just tweak the zerg in a way that the match up is not imbalanced anymore, then Z will be overpower.
|
theory zvp i think its a combination with 2 things
reason 1 protoss has figured out the early game more, how to expand safely and getting a greater economy than zerg. (forge expand gets more economy than a pool expand or gas pool expand, at the same time it can punish a hatchery first with cannon rush). so then zergs option to catch up is to take a extremely fast 3rd base but this has been prooven many times to die to 6warpgate +1 timing attacks or the simple voidray +streamline of phoenixes.
the 3warpgate expand has its own beauty on smaller maps but also maps without as wide chokes. the units themselves are sentrys which not only defends any allin zerg does, also they build up energy to be great in mid and late game. on top of this creating these units themselves forces zerg to build defenses. and not a too uncommon strategy is to cancel the nexus and go for an allin, which zerg has no possibility to scout in time to prepare, so zergs only option is to overmake defenses every time he see 3warpgate expand.
so to sum it up the only way you dont fall behind vs a 3warpgate expand on rather small maps is too take huge risks and hope he dont cancel the nexus and did a 4/5gate fake nexus strategy.
and on big maps they can comfortably forge expand without any risk what so ever of cheese if they scout well and always get a unfair lead.
reason 2 protoss used to be this timing attack race off of 2 or 3 bases but recently they have figured out all they have to do is max out on 200 food and only turtle because no matter how many bases zerg has he still cant get a huge economic lead because u cant literally produce over 80 drones. zerg became the timing attack player instead, using his "economic lead" on 3-4 bases and trying to break down the protoss before his army gets too big, or simply damage it alot and rebuild and go for it again, while expanding. but this is extremely hard when protoss gets an easy 3rd base (tal darim, terminus etc). zerg is the race that wants to army trade on an even field so protoss has simply realized that there is never a reason to attack unless zerg gets too overgreedy. (and ofcourse toss has even the option to respond with another expansion aswell so again protoss attacking is always a threat to zerg but its never a must for protoss).
and once protoss gets 3 bases up and running for 1-2 minutes the zerg overpower style (attack, rebuild, attack, streamline) doesnt work anymore because protoss can rebuild at an almost equal rate. plus the larger protoss army it gets the less units they lose in fights)
so when it comes to 200 food deathballs. protoss should in theory always win, everyone knows that. so zerg is the race that wants to battle kill the majority of protosses army and then rebuild (using his bigger saved up money to his advantage).
now ive written down the way zvp should be, disregarding how hard it is for each race to execute their play so here comes the skill requiring part so not only is protoss the stronger race right now in theory. it is also easier to play the race which is widely known for anyone thats high level to know. to be the aggressor throughout the game and find ways to break the protoss is alot harder for zerg than for protoss to just figure out how to defend. also mechanically speaking the race is vastly harder aswell. and when it comes to mistakes you can make it your macro (money growing up, forgetting injects or chronoboost zerg is alot more unforgiving). if i play vs midlevel protoss users who only play the turtle style i cant even tell a difference from our best protosses in europe, except for maybe the microcontrol. whenever you see zvp on TSL or NASL or GSL, people are always judging the zerg what he is doing wrong, what he should be doing you can note if he forgets to spread creep or when his money gets high you call thats why he lose. protosses is like 80% of the case the one thats executing more badly than the zerg but nobody is mentioning that because its harder to see and it doesnt matter because the toss end up cleaning up anyway. i know i come off as extremely biased because i havent been doing too well in tournaments lately vs protosses but keep in mind. i dont ladder, all my zvp practice comes from literally only playing progamer protosses and talking to them about the game and how this matchup works (mainly with naniwa). i wouldnt come here and say toss is alot easier to play than zerg if they wouldnt tell me the same. im not a toss progamer but they say themselves zerg has to be vastly superior to compete on the same level. i have alot to improve on in zvp but i dont see myself worse than any other zerg in this matchup and i hope you can trust my word for that. ive been practicing this matchup almost exlusivly the past weeks and still my winratio in zvt is about 20% higher than in zvp. ive practiced mutalisk play, ive tried multipromt attacks and nyduses. and high infestor play. but the overpower style is the absolute best way (and most solid imo) to play this matchup
|
On April 20 2011 18:23 MorroW wrote: theory zvp i think its a combination with 2 things
reason 1 protoss has figured out the early game more, how to expand safely and getting a greater economy than zerg. (forge expand gets more economy than a pool expand or gas pool expand, at the same time it can punish a hatchery first with cannon rush). so then zergs option to catch up is to take a extremely fast 3rd base but this has been prooven many times to die to 6warpgate +1 timing attacks or the simple voidray +streamline of phoenixes.
the 3warpgate expand has its own beauty on smaller maps but also maps without as wide chokes. the units themselves are sentrys which not only defends any allin zerg does, also they build up energy to be great in mid and late game. on top of this creating these units themselves forces zerg to build defenses. and not a too uncommon strategy is to cancel the nexus and go for an allin, which zerg has no possibility to scout in time to prepare, so zergs only option is to overmake defenses every time he see 3warpgate expand.
so to sum it up the only way you dont fall behind vs a 3warpgate expand on rather small maps is too take huge risks and hope he dont cancel the nexus and did a 4/5gate fake nexus strategy.
and on big maps they can comfortably forge expand without any risk what so ever of cheese if they scout well and always get a unfair lead.
reason 2 protoss used to be this timing attack race off of 2 or 3 bases but recently they have figured out all they have to do is max out on 200 food and only turtle because no matter how many bases zerg has he still cant get a huge economic lead because u cant literally produce over 80 drones. zerg became the timing attack player instead, using his "economic lead" on 3-4 bases and trying to break down the protoss before his army gets too big, or simply damage it alot and rebuild and go for it again, while expanding. but this is extremely hard when protoss gets an easy 3rd base (tal darim, terminus etc). zerg is the race that wants to army trade on an even field so protoss has simply realized that there is never a reason to attack unless zerg gets too overgreedy. (and ofcourse toss has even the option to respond with another expansion aswell so again protoss attacking is always a threat to zerg but its never a must for protoss).
and once protoss gets 3 bases up and running for 1-2 minutes the zerg overpower style (attack, rebuild, attack, streamline) doesnt work anymore because protoss can rebuild at an almost equal rate. plus the larger protoss army it gets the less units they lose in fights)
so when it comes to 200 food deathballs. protoss should in theory always win, everyone knows that. so zerg is the race that wants to battle kill the majority of protosses army and then rebuild (using his bigger saved up money to his advantage).
now ive written down the way zvp should be, disregarding how hard it is for each race to execute their play so here comes the skill requiring part so not only is protoss the stronger race right now in theory. it is also easier to play the race which is widely known for anyone thats high level to know. to be the aggressor throughout the game and find ways to break the protoss is alot harder for zerg than for protoss to just figure out how to defend. also mechanically speaking the race is vastly harder aswell. and when it comes to mistakes you can make it your macro (money growing up, forgetting injects or chronoboost zerg is alot more unforgiving). if i play vs midlevel protoss users who only play the turtle style i cant even tell a difference from our best protosses in europe, except for maybe the microcontrol. whenever you see zvp on TSL or NASL or GSL, people are always judging the zerg what he is doing wrong, what he should be doing you can note if he forgets to spread creep or when his money gets high you call thats why he lose. protosses is like 80% of the case the one thats executing more badly than the zerg but nobody is mentioning that because its harder to see and it doesnt matter because the toss end up cleaning up anyway. i know i come off as extremely biased because i havent been doing too well in tournaments lately vs protosses but keep in mind. i dont ladder, all my zvp practice comes from literally only playing progamer protosses and talking to them about the game and how this matchup works (mainly with naniwa). i wouldnt come here and say toss is alot easier to play than zerg if they wouldnt tell me the same. im not a toss progamer but they say themselves zerg has to be vastly superior to compete on the same level. i have alot to improve on in zvp but i dont see myself worse than any other zerg in this matchup and i hope you can trust my word for that. ive been practicing this matchup almost exlusivly the past weeks and still my winratio in zvt is about 20% higher than in zvp. ive practiced mutalisk play, ive tried multipromt attacks and nyduses. and high infestor play. but the overpower style is the absolute best way (and most solid imo) to play this matchup Morrow, don't you think that, if we had some kind of lurkerish unit that could defend cost efficiently against any kind of 4/6 gate push, we could tech up and beat the death ball with a mix of infestor / high tech units ?
Also, I saw you using baneling bomb against socke, did you let go that idea ? You made none against you compadre HasuObs.
|
On April 20 2011 18:29 WhiteDog wrote: Morrow, don't you think that, if we had some kind of lurkerish unit that could defend cost efficiently against any kind of 4/6 gate push, we could tech up and beat the death ball with a mix of infestor / high tech units ?
Also, I saw you using baneling bomb against socke, did you let go that idea ? You made none against you compadre HasuObs. I dont think this is a good place to discuss what kind of units Zerg needs. Rather think about how to beat Protoss in the current patch.
|
On April 20 2011 18:32 magha wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2011 18:29 WhiteDog wrote: Morrow, don't you think that, if we had some kind of lurkerish unit that could defend cost efficiently against any kind of 4/6 gate push, we could tech up and beat the death ball with a mix of infestor / high tech units ?
Also, I saw you using baneling bomb against socke, did you let go that idea ? You made none against you compadre HasuObs. I dont think this is a good place to discuss what kind of units Zerg needs. Rather think about how to beat Protoss in the current patch. That's my point, the match up will always be a gamble on zerg side because we do not have a defensive unit and we have limited knowledge due to lack of scouting early game (before overlord speed).
|
|
On April 20 2011 18:09 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2011 12:37 Elefanto wrote:On April 20 2011 08:12 WhiteDog wrote:
Even the last "original" play, like mondragon or spanishiwa, are all MADE to compensate that weakness: spanishiwa just mass spine and queen so that he can tech up without having to make a shitload of roach/hydra or ling/baneling and keep all his gaz to tech, but to do that he just cripple his agressive capacities early game (and in my opinion it's a shitty "style" that should not work). Mondragon on the other side just counter that by being very agressive with the most cost efficient unit the zerg have: the roach (you know, if you don't want to defend, just play agressive). But zerg is also shitty to play agressive: we have no units with high range high speed that are great to harass (we have one high range and slow, one fast and low range).
That's the right attitude by dismissing other styles and saying shit is broken and needs to be patched. Maybe that's the reason zergs aren't really doing progress. Players that are pursuing their own ZvP style (spanishiwa / mondragon / sheth) seem to do quite well in that matchup. Show nested quote +On April 20 2011 08:12 WhiteDog wrote: But here is the problem about zerg, and the problem in ZvP in my opinion. Zerg are weak to scout until overlord speed, so we can just guess and act on the guess that we have AND the zerg have NO DEFENSIVE UNIT. There is no, NOT ONE, unit that help zerg defend cost efficiently. The lurker is no more, so the only way to defend is to OUTMUSCLE your opponent: you need to build a shitload of unit.
Queens and Spines are efficient defensive units, available very early in the game. Exactly, Queens and spines. But when you build them, you just let go any kind of early agression: why does the protoss just don't abuse that by expanding a lot ? They did not have figured it out yet. The future of ZvP will more about be denying scout, abusing weird timing attack or death ball it up in a way that zerg will have to prepare to counter everything and, in the end, just die because of the lack of tech unit / good enough economy. All in all, ZvP will not be balanced until the next expansion, because what zerg needs is a new unit with a very cost efficient defensive power like the lurker. If you just tweak the zerg in a way that the match up is not imbalanced anymore, then Z will be overpower. Forge FE is the standard Protoss opening in BW PvZ, and it's quite common in SC2 if the map is amenable. Protoss players apparently do not find it necessary to apply early pressure if they can pump workers on two early bases from behind a static defense (which they grow as appropriate to the level of threat from the opponent, given somewhat limited but highly valued scouting information). Why do Zerg?
And Protoss's defense doesn't spread creep, or relocate itself...
I'm also not convinced a double expand would counter the Ice Fisher style. The Zerg's economic boost will kick in long before the Protoss's, and then Protoss is strewn out defending three bases with far fewer units.
|
On April 20 2011 18:34 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2011 18:32 magha wrote:On April 20 2011 18:29 WhiteDog wrote: Morrow, don't you think that, if we had some kind of lurkerish unit that could defend cost efficiently against any kind of 4/6 gate push, we could tech up and beat the death ball with a mix of infestor / high tech units ?
Also, I saw you using baneling bomb against socke, did you let go that idea ? You made none against you compadre HasuObs. I dont think this is a good place to discuss what kind of units Zerg needs. Rather think about how to beat Protoss in the current patch. That's my point, the match up will always be a gamble on zerg side because we do not have a defensive unit and we have limited knowledge due to lack of scouting early game (before overlord speed).
Lol...
Deja vu anyone?
This sounds like threads made for protoss back in the day... and for terran too..
I say people need to stop complaining so much and start practicing the un-practiceable. Start playing that 'unplayable' strategy. Start doing that 'unmicroable' micro.
That's how we got gosu sentry ff skill. That's how we got gosu marine split micro. That's how we overcome current 'metagame' problems.
Remember, it's always undoable/unplayable/broken... until that one person shows us that it isn't. =)
|
On April 20 2011 19:11 andrewwiggin wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2011 18:34 WhiteDog wrote:On April 20 2011 18:32 magha wrote:On April 20 2011 18:29 WhiteDog wrote: Morrow, don't you think that, if we had some kind of lurkerish unit that could defend cost efficiently against any kind of 4/6 gate push, we could tech up and beat the death ball with a mix of infestor / high tech units ?
Also, I saw you using baneling bomb against socke, did you let go that idea ? You made none against you compadre HasuObs. I dont think this is a good place to discuss what kind of units Zerg needs. Rather think about how to beat Protoss in the current patch. That's my point, the match up will always be a gamble on zerg side because we do not have a defensive unit and we have limited knowledge due to lack of scouting early game (before overlord speed). Lol... Deja vu anyone? This sounds like threads made for protoss back in the day... and for terran too.. I say people need to stop complaining so much and start practicing the un-practiceable. Start playing that 'unplayable' strategy. Start doing that 'unmicroable' micro. That's how we got gosu sentry ff skill. That's how we got gosu marine split micro. That's how we overcome current 'metagame' problems. Remember, it's always undoable/unplayable/broken... until that one person shows us that it isn't. =) Read my post, we have no cost efficient way to defend our bases except for static defense. Sentry, marine are cost efficient in almost every situation and great for defense (not to mention tank, wall in and photon canon). This is not a deja vu, because we have 9 units.
I did not say it is undoable, unplayable or broken, just said this match up is and will still be a gamble for a long time.
Forge FE is the standard Protoss opening in BW PvZ, and it's quite common in SC2 if the map is amenable. Protoss players apparently do not find it necessary to apply early pressure if they can pump workers on two early bases from behind a static defense (which they grow as appropriate to the level of threat from the opponent, given somewhat limited but highly valued scouting information). Why do Zerg?
And Protoss's defense doesn't spread creep, or relocate itself...
I'm also not convinced a double expand would counter the Ice Fisher style. The Zerg's economic boost will kick in long before the Protoss's, and then Protoss is strewn out defending three bases with far fewer units. Yet you can easily defend as protoss, Cruncher basically double expanded on shakuras and defended quite easily against a heavy roach agressive play with no spine crawler / queen at all (which means more roach ?). You are not "convinced", that's funny, just try out and perfect the build, that's basically what everyone is saying to us zerg when we say that nydus are not the solution.
|
On April 20 2011 19:11 andrewwiggin wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2011 18:34 WhiteDog wrote:On April 20 2011 18:32 magha wrote:On April 20 2011 18:29 WhiteDog wrote: Morrow, don't you think that, if we had some kind of lurkerish unit that could defend cost efficiently against any kind of 4/6 gate push, we could tech up and beat the death ball with a mix of infestor / high tech units ?
Also, I saw you using baneling bomb against socke, did you let go that idea ? You made none against you compadre HasuObs. I dont think this is a good place to discuss what kind of units Zerg needs. Rather think about how to beat Protoss in the current patch. That's my point, the match up will always be a gamble on zerg side because we do not have a defensive unit and we have limited knowledge due to lack of scouting early game (before overlord speed). Lol... Deja vu anyone? This sounds like threads made for protoss back in the day... and for terran too.. I say people need to stop complaining so much and start practicing the un-practiceable. Start playing that 'unplayable' strategy. Start doing that 'unmicroable' micro. That's how we got gosu sentry ff skill. That's how we got gosu marine split micro. That's how we overcome current 'metagame' problems. Remember, it's always undoable/unplayable/broken... until that one person shows us that it isn't. =)
What unmicroable micro? Zerg don't have any microable units. Like, none. At all. There's a very good reason that stutter step, marine splits and FFs have been invented and perfected while Zerg has done nothing of the sort. Protoss is designed to have lots of micro possibilites, Terran is half/half and Zerg is a race designed to macro hard and 1a a lot. They have no real abilities to speak of, and all have sub-par range, which prevents any sort of fancy kiting micro. There just aren't any fancy micro tricks to discover other than burrow micro, which has already been discovered and is rendered entirely useless by a single detector.
|
On April 20 2011 19:17 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2011 19:11 andrewwiggin wrote:On April 20 2011 18:34 WhiteDog wrote:On April 20 2011 18:32 magha wrote:On April 20 2011 18:29 WhiteDog wrote: Morrow, don't you think that, if we had some kind of lurkerish unit that could defend cost efficiently against any kind of 4/6 gate push, we could tech up and beat the death ball with a mix of infestor / high tech units ?
Also, I saw you using baneling bomb against socke, did you let go that idea ? You made none against you compadre HasuObs. I dont think this is a good place to discuss what kind of units Zerg needs. Rather think about how to beat Protoss in the current patch. That's my point, the match up will always be a gamble on zerg side because we do not have a defensive unit and we have limited knowledge due to lack of scouting early game (before overlord speed). Lol... Deja vu anyone? This sounds like threads made for protoss back in the day... and for terran too.. I say people need to stop complaining so much and start practicing the un-practiceable. Start playing that 'unplayable' strategy. Start doing that 'unmicroable' micro. That's how we got gosu sentry ff skill. That's how we got gosu marine split micro. That's how we overcome current 'metagame' problems. Remember, it's always undoable/unplayable/broken... until that one person shows us that it isn't. =) Read my post, we have no cost efficient way to defend our bases except for static defense. Sentry, marine are cost efficient in almost every situation and great for defense (not to mention tank, wall in and photon canon). This is not a deja vu, because we have 9 units. I did not say it is undoable, unplayable or broken, just said this match up is and will still be a gamble for a long time.
Read my post, I've read well reasoned arguments for why toss and terran were too weak in early game or mid game or late game since the beta up until a two gsls ago. Guess what? None of it matters until every possible style of play, every avenue of play, the highest skill ceiling of each race has been reached.
And it hasn't. Until then, you can't say with absolute certainty 'OH OH, we can't win because of X, or because of Y or blah blah'.
Unless you're a gosu sc2 player from the future who's figured it all out? But I'm guessing the answer to that one is... no.
OH and PS. Blizzard is still patching. There are still expansions coming up. I don't get the whining -_-
|
On April 20 2011 19:27 andrewwiggin wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2011 19:17 WhiteDog wrote:On April 20 2011 19:11 andrewwiggin wrote:On April 20 2011 18:34 WhiteDog wrote:On April 20 2011 18:32 magha wrote:On April 20 2011 18:29 WhiteDog wrote: Morrow, don't you think that, if we had some kind of lurkerish unit that could defend cost efficiently against any kind of 4/6 gate push, we could tech up and beat the death ball with a mix of infestor / high tech units ?
Also, I saw you using baneling bomb against socke, did you let go that idea ? You made none against you compadre HasuObs. I dont think this is a good place to discuss what kind of units Zerg needs. Rather think about how to beat Protoss in the current patch. That's my point, the match up will always be a gamble on zerg side because we do not have a defensive unit and we have limited knowledge due to lack of scouting early game (before overlord speed). Lol... Deja vu anyone? This sounds like threads made for protoss back in the day... and for terran too.. I say people need to stop complaining so much and start practicing the un-practiceable. Start playing that 'unplayable' strategy. Start doing that 'unmicroable' micro. That's how we got gosu sentry ff skill. That's how we got gosu marine split micro. That's how we overcome current 'metagame' problems. Remember, it's always undoable/unplayable/broken... until that one person shows us that it isn't. =) Read my post, we have no cost efficient way to defend our bases except for static defense. Sentry, marine are cost efficient in almost every situation and great for defense (not to mention tank, wall in and photon canon). This is not a deja vu, because we have 9 units. I did not say it is undoable, unplayable or broken, just said this match up is and will still be a gamble for a long time. Read my post, I've read well reasoned arguments for why toss and terran were too weak in early game or mid game or late game since the beta up until a two gsls ago. Guess what? None of it matters until every possible style of play, every avenue of play, the highest skill ceiling of each race has been reached. And it hasn't. Until then, you can't say with absolute certainty 'OH OH, we can't win because of X, or because of Y or blah blah'. Unless you're a gosu sc2 player from the future who's figured it all out? But I'm guessing the answer to that one is... no. OH and PS. Blizzard is still patching. There are still expansions coming up. I don't get the whining -_- I've never said it is impossible, i said it's a gamble zerg have to take. Play zerg, come again. You are actually theorycrafting and just refuse to see the game: we have 9 unit, one caster that is slow offcreep and deal 0 damage, one caster that is in T2 and useless to defend any kind of early game attack. Our unit to defend are : ling bling roach hydra. Without high ground miss rate: not cost-efficient.
And yes, I'm actually saying patch will just ruin the balance, what we need is the expand and one good cost efficient defensive unit.
|
lol it's useless arguing on the internet. I guess everyone's right then......
But I'd like to call out everyone complaining about zerg and say.. do you TRULY BELIEVE that you'll still be complaining a month, two months, even 6 months from now?
Answer me that one oh great and all knowing zerg theorists.
...
|
On April 20 2011 19:31 andrewwiggin wrote: lol it's useless arguing on the internet. I guess everyone's right then......
But I'd like to call out everyone complaining about zerg and say.. do you TRULY BELIEVE that you'll still be complaining a month, two months, even 6 months from now?
Answer me that one oh great and all knowing zerg theorists.
... You believe, I see facts.
|
On April 20 2011 16:17 partysnatcher wrote: I made that post extra provoking to get some responses.
My background is I've played RTS for many years, including on pro level. For years, replays, mainly WC3 and SC:BW, was my main sparetime entertainment, and I estimate I've seen about 1500-2000 pro replays in my time. In other words, I have sufficient metacognition about RTSing to know the dynamics, estimate risks / potential / effort / concentration involved in RTS exchanges.
In your post here, you seem to be mixing two concepts:
1) Zergs "required skill", where Zergs always need an extra layer of multitasking for expanding, queens and larvae, on top of everything else they want to do. Also, the tiny margin of error which requires perfectionism in every attack. 2) Terran (and Protoss') "opportunity skill", where the micro and harassment has a refinement potential (stim / kite / blink / forcefield / drops / etc) that does not exist for Zerg.
To illustrate, Zergs improvement over time curve is slow at the beginning, then rises fast, until the curve flattens out where Protoss and Terrans curves continue rising due to having more opportunities for refinement.
Delusions of grandeur - where would Zerg players get that from? Hardly winning any tournaments? Being beaten by simple build orders? You argue that Zergs often lose to over- or underdroning - that's how the game goes when you are forced to play to someone else's tune.
Expanding is something the other races have to think of, and is harder to pull off with the other races. The zerg larva and queen mechanic is in no way harder than the other races macro mechanics. There is a lot of room to perfect it, but the basic gist of it is pretty simplistic, keep your larva injects up and you can macro easily.
2. We have seen very few zergs use "opportunity skill" harassment methods, but when they do, it's surprisingly effective, i.e high econ baneling busts, ling counter attacks, hydra/ling/bling drops, fungaling mineral lines etc, and you can't conclude that zerg can't do it.
Also, you playing/watching 1500 games doesn't mean much. It's yet again a subjective point. Idra is arguably one of the best players in the world, but he's still extremely biased and subjective.
Also, zergs delusion of grandeur comes from a circle jerk of "we da best larva so hard" mindset, nothing to do with actual achievements.
On April 20 2011 16:57 ppdealer wrote: No they don't. Infestors are limited to their energy; Broodlords are T3.
So what that Infestors are limited by energy? So are sentries, which are protoss main defensive unit.
On April 20 2011 16:57 ppdealer wrote: 1. So according to you, it's easy for Zerg to play laid back macro while being safe from all the different early aggression and cheese that a Terran or Protoss can do, but it's hard for a Protoss to just sit on 3 bases with FFs and cannons and mass up a deathball? Give me a fucking break.
I'm not gonna argue with rest of his points since they are stupid as hell and, as you said, pointless. But the fact remains, almost every pro Zerg has complained about Zerg being UP one way or another, while Boxer is basically only Terran who's ever complained his race, and that was way back when Fruitdealer was somehow considered the top player in the world. There was never a time when Zerg was considered "strong" except when Roaches got a range buff. Zerg has been consistently underrepresented at top levels since the game's release and if anyone's delusional, it's you.
Zerg early game volatility has nothing to do with their macro mechanics/difficulty or required skill to play the race, and is mainly a product of stupid design. Their macro mechanics are not that hard. As far as people complaining about being UP. Since when is balance whine a legit argument? Terrans have been whining about protoss endgame since forever by the way, and zerg right now is considered strong once it reaches the mid-endgame against terran. Not that it matters, as is has nothing to do with my point to begin with.
You need to understand what delusions of grandeur actually means...
|
|
|
|