[D] ZvP an unlikely unit composition

Sluggy

United States128 Posts

February 12 2011 02:34 GMT

Point Of This Post
I believe I have found a way to play zerg that avoids the late game pitfalls that you fall in to with roach/hydra/corruptor. Below I outline the general strategy, and compare it with roach based play via an analysis of the recent code S match between + Show Spoiler +

Julyzerg and MC

, as it was a beautiful display of core issues in the current ZvP meta.

Supplementary Replays
some recent ZvP replays

About Me
+ Show Spoiler +

I played starcraft from 1998-2002 before I raged at goliaths and got sucked in to counter-strike. I came back to RTS during SC2 beta, so I have been away for a while. I have been casually watching pro brood war and GSL throughout this ~12 year timeframe. Playing around 3400 masters on the ladder. I am old.

Basic Strategy
+ Show Spoiler +

This has nothing to do with build orders, it is just a loose framework of how to approach the match-up. The aim is to do the following, in no particular order:

- Get an expansion
- Get ling speed
- Get melee/armor upgrades
- Get banelings
- Get more bases
- Get overlord upgrades
- Get infestors

The aim is to reach the midgame with upgraded ling/baneling and infestors. Hydras or Ultras are added when econ allows for it

Why these upgrades? Why these units?
- You are going to be using a lot of lings, so get ling speed.

- You are going to be using banelings against sentries, so get drops and over lord speed

- +2 melee for your core army/allows 1 shot kills on workers with banelings/smooth ultra
transition

- +2 carapace keeps your ling armor on par with zeal attack upgrades, smooth ultra transition

- Infestors step in to mitigate damage once colossus hit critical mass. They also compliment
baneling drops when sentries are still in play. In other words you get extra force field
management at tier 2 instead of waiting for ultras. They are relatively safe from getting sniped
when there are baneling linebackers in front of them, making NP not a waste of time and energy

- Once infestors are in play, It is no longer pointless to invest in hydras vs colossus. Just as
banelings protect the infestors, the infestors in a way protect the hydras. In return the hydras
protect infestors from anything that gets by the banelings, such as unexpected flanks, phoenix,
and blink stalkers. This unit chemistry reminds me of a strong chess position where the pieces
work in unison and allow their teammates to play at their maximum potential (like D ROSE).

- Focusing on banelings rather than roaches opens up more early game larva for droning. The
simple ability to morph or not to morph should not be overlooked when squeezing out as many
drones as possible. With roaches you get safety right this instant, with zergling/baneling
you get econ right this instant, and safety when you need it.

When should I take my third?

- Against heavy sentry: as a general rule, if you have any chance of being monster ranched by
forcefields, you want to time it so that overlord drops has kicked in.

- Against anything else take it early. upgraded lings against stalkers is fun. Early void rays can
be annoying to expand against but if you plan ahead with an extra queen or two connecting your
your natural and third it should be easy to hold it. If you even think they are doing anything
more than one void ray, build a spore and walk it over there so you can plant it as soon as the
the hatch finishes or your creep gets there, whichever comes first.

What if they go dts and I wasn't ready for it?
- 4 emergency manually detonated banelings per dt is better than losing the game.

Strengths
+ Show Spoiler +

This is an extremely focused strategy where each upgrade works together cohesively with the rest of your gas investments. This focus opens up more opportunities for droning harder, and in turn exponential gains on your way to the late game. Hydra drops compliment this style well, whether he is going colossus or not. Having a strong baneling foundation allows for two amazing units, hydra and infestor, to be added without a huge "what-if-he-transitions-to-x?" risk. I'd like to emphasize the fact that you get comfort at tier 2 without any huge rush to get to tier 3. A very natural and focused tech progression with a clear plan leads to confidence and smoothness in your play and should not be understated.

Weaknesses
+ Show Spoiler +

Strong tactical play from the protoss is the biggest weakness. Any experienced protoss will be picking off overlords filled with banelings by using blink stalkers or anything else that shoots up. You can help with this by prioritizing sentries with fungal growth and a follow up drop on them. Once they are removed you no longer need to haul banes in overlords. Archons are sexy as hell against ling/baneling. This is balanced out by them being a prime target for NP. High temps are obviously a great choice against this, even just feedback is huge for increasing the potency of the toss army by taking away any advantages infestors give. Immortals are strong if you can avoid having them get surrounded by zerglings. Finally, you are vulnerable to sentry based attacks before drops come in to play, which is why it is critical to have drops done around the time a typical 6 gate timing hits. I will take playing with these weaknesses over supply hogs like roach/corruptor.

Comparison with roach/hydra and a Code-S case study
+ Show Spoiler +

JulyZerg is fucking awesome. If you watch his game against MC:

http://www.gomtv.net/2011gslsponsors2/vod/61321

He played a strategy brilliantly. He maxed out fast against a stalker/sentry/col army with roach/hydra/corruptor/banelings in overlords. That is a sick composition, but he got absolutely and utterly destroyed. Why? I think it's for a several reasons. Let's go with the obvious fact that MC is amazing. His micro was flawless, expansion timing was godly, and his transition to HT was completely smooth. What could July have done? How could he have balanced his roach/corruptor/hydra composition so that he had a chance to even approach MC's army? Would he have done better to just not do banelings at all? Maybe, but my answer to this question is, I don't think there is really any possible way he could have balanced that better other than the fact he overproduced corruptors. But what would he make instead, more roaches? Sure he sloppily attack moved after his baneling drops got managed, but the game was over before that happened, and July knew it.

I think a better question to ask is, what is wrong with his composition and what could be changed? Roaches and corruptors are supply hogs. Overproducing corruptors allows you to get a litttle bit suicidal on colossus to open up attack potential. Even after the colossus go down, sentries still stand. Roach/hydra isn't that good against stalker/sentry, especially when you have overproduced corruptors and are playing against a 3-4 base toss that is already transitioning in to high temps to make your hydras useless. July knows this so he gets baneling drops, the idea being that if he can get rid of the sentries his roach/hydra can actually attack. MC, being a step ahead made it impossible for july to get rid of sentries by keeping them back, and keeping overlords at bay with blink stalkers. Now July has killed the colossus sure, but he is left with a mostly useless roach army that gets dominated by forcefields, and a wasted investment of banelings and overlord drops.

At the core of this scenario is one driving theme: the roaches keep you alive and allow you to max out, but your chances of attacking are absolutely nil with sentries in play. Your anti sentry plan got anti-anti-sentried so you're now stuck with 80-100 supply of useless roaches, no hive tech, and shitty upgrades.

July's strategy, and in my opinion the current zerg approach lacks focus. There is no smooth hive transition because you spend all money(and supply) on corruptors. Against a player like MC, shit gets real before you have a chance to safely get to hive/brood lords. There isn't enough gas to go around for hive, 3-3 upgrades(let alone 2-2), corruptor upgrades, greater spire, banelings, and overlord drops. The composition is spread way too thin to have any chance at a reasonable time.

Think about this: The entire point of going roaches is they are great defensively against gateway based attacks, and alternatives like ling/muta absolutely suck balls in this matchup. The transition to corruptor is pretty smooth as well once colossus are made in response. Roaches are simply not an effective core unit against protoss in the late game. I firmly believe they become obsolete against any 3+ base protoss. Starting with ling/baneling drops circumvents this need for roaches, and allows real chances for guaranteed sentry removal with fungal growth and banelings. Even if you can't attack, you can safely expand and naturally make your way to 3/5 ultras which decimate stalker/col/sentry/temp. I don't know what a player like MC would do against this defensive baneling drop in to infestor+hydra style, but I can almost guarantee it will look completely different than stalker/sentry/col.

Muta/Ling Is Terrible
+ Show Spoiler +

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say muta/ling is terrible against toss and should not be bothered with. The reason being you are critically vulnerable to forcefield pressure before your spire is up, and even after that, gshield is so good, as are phoenix transitions. Great harrasment combo for sure, but you eventually need to kill the death ball to win. I think some kind of ling/muta/corruptor combo has promise against phoenix/void/col, but un-upgraded muta/corruptor are too quick to become useless after a complete non-colossus transition to ground. For it to be useful there would have to be a well thought out path to broodlord and I don't see that happening while getting upgrades for both air and ground. It's possible, but not focused. As an example of a pretty good player falling in to this trap, watch + Show Spoiler +

GSL 4: Code A ro32 junwi vs alicia

Conclusion
+ Show Spoiler +

Check out the replays for a basic idea of what you can get away with, and where there is room for improvement. There are like 10 games in that rep pack, but to make it easier I plan to edit this post later with replays that demonstrate all the key points against toss that I feel are stronger. I will also comment a couple of losses of mine that showcase mistakes I've made that are completely avoidable, such as overdroning, approaching a death ball the wrong way, impatient attacks, and trying to force a win and losing an advantage.

Arantir

United States53 Posts

February 12 2011 03:53 GMT

Interesting, but I don't think that its that effective. The reason roaches and hydras are great are because they are durable, larvae efficient, and cost efficient. Banelings are incredibly supply efficient (400 banes beats any ground army except mass tanks and mass T3); but they aren't that larvae efficient and they cost a TON. Basically, roaches let you drone harder. However, relying partially on baneling drops, especially once collosi are out allows you to abuse their AoE damage against a protoss deathball. It will work, but it is going to cost more than the toss spent on their deathball.

Vod.kaholic

United States1052 Posts

February 12 2011 04:16 GMT

How do you deal with a protoss who incorporates air (carriers, mothership) and sentries into his deathball once he realizes you're primarily going baneling/infestor? Sentries IMO are the hardest thing for banelings to deal with.

Kujawa

United States137 Posts

February 12 2011 04:28 GMT

heres the thing tho your not saving larva going bling infestor. Zerglings take up more larva than roaches to get an affective mass.

morimacil

France921 Posts

February 12 2011 04:38 GMT

The banelings are quite awesome against deathballs.
But your strategy of just baneling infestor, is not very awesome.

See, for example, banelings against marine balls, are also great. But in ZvT, you dont just go mass baneling, and hope he goes mass marines. You either scout that he is going mass marines, and respond with banelings, or you harass with mutas, forcing him to make marines, and then you make banelings.

But the problem with your strategy, is that you are just hoping that the toss will make a deathball so you can use your banelings. There is nothing in your strat to force him to clump up, and there is nothing in your strat to punish him if he doesnt clump up. If he splits his ball in 5, and attacks all of your bases at once before reaching his supply cap, then you are basically dead.
Its true that the "standard" play for toss right now is to just sit back, and make a big deathball, yes. And if you leave a toss all alone, he will most likely just sit back and build a deathball by default, also true.
But since there is absolutely nothing in your strategy forcing him to do that, if you actually meet a toss who understands the purpose, and more importantly, the reason for forming a deathball....
Hell, he could even make a deathball, realize that you have absolutely nothing threatening to units that arent clumped up, spread out all his forces and attack you, and you cant do anything about it :/

Sluggy

United States128 Posts

February 12 2011 05:31 GMT

On February 12 2011 13:38 morimacil wrote:
The banelings are quite awesome against deathballs.
But your strategy of just baneling infestor, is not very awesome.

See, for example, banelings against marine balls, are also great. But in ZvT, you dont just go mass baneling, and hope he goes mass marines. You either scout that he is going mass marines, and respond with banelings, or you harass with mutas, forcing him to make marines, and then you make banelings.

But the problem with your strategy, is that you are just hoping that the toss will make a deathball so you can use your banelings. There is nothing in your strat to force him to clump up, and there is nothing in your strat to punish him if he doesnt clump up. If he splits his ball in 5, and attacks all of your bases at once before reaching his supply cap, then you are basically dead.
Its true that the "standard" play for toss right now is to just sit back, and make a big deathball, yes. And if you leave a toss all alone, he will most likely just sit back and build a deathball by default, also true.
But since there is absolutely nothing in your strategy forcing him to do that, if you actually meet a toss who understands the purpose, and more importantly, the reason for forming a deathball....
Hell, he could even make a deathball, realize that you have absolutely nothing threatening to units that arent clumped up, spread out all his forces and attack you, and you cant do anything about it :/

Correct me if I'm wrong but banelings are more larva efficient than roach. Take a simple case to hold some early pressure - 10 larva worth of lings vs 10 larva worth of roaches. You get 10 roaches which are nice defenders but they immediately cost 75/25. If you just build the 20 zerglings and wait to morph them until you absolutely need them, you will be able to get more drones out because you only spent 50 mins instead of 75 right at that moment when you committed the larva to defense. You can get on 4 gas quicker, and take a 3rd quicker. Of course 20 banelings costs twice as much than 10 roaches in the long run but you don't even have to commit all the lings to banelings anyway and having the option to choose when you make them is huge when you are trying to squeeze drones out. Just take what you need to survive and drone your balls off the rest of the time. Roach takes away some of this flexibility because you are spending the 75 minerals and 25 gas right that moment. Remember, this was an argument for larva efficiency, not cost efficiency. If you want to compare 10 roach vs 10 baneling + 10 ling go for it, but take in to consideration the flexibility i just mentioned seven times.

I am not intimidated at all against a toss spreading his forces. 2-2 lings shred separated units easily and you just keep your infestors ready to np immortal/archon/colossus/void rays/mothership/whatever. Banelings act as linebackers to shit on the chest of anyone who wants to approach the infestors. Besides all that, I question how much a toss can spread his units effectively when baneling splash radius is super retardedly large.

The entire point, though, is that the baneling/infestor composition is designed to take down death balls, but it is flexible enough to where you can do anything you want if he plays a real game. You aren't married to it. You always have the option of not morphing to banes at all. It is just the go-to to keep you alive against dumb all ins while you get on 8 gas and punish him for playing like a tool.

Sluggy

United States128 Posts

February 12 2011 05:38 GMT

On February 12 2011 13:16 Vod.kaholic wrote:
How do you deal with a protoss who incorporates air (carriers, mothership) and sentries into his deathball once he realizes you're primarily going baneling/infestor? Sentries IMO are the hardest thing for banelings to deal with.

If a protoss is going mass air I cut way back on banelings and put 12 ish in overlords for the sentries and switch to corruptor or hydra. I haven't faced heavy carrier play whlie doing this opening. In my experience straight hydra blows ass against carrier and hydra/infestor is fragile against it, so I think a corruptor switch is the strongest way to go. In the replays I posted there are several reps of forcefield being negligible because they were trying to attack spots that were protected by banelings in overlords.

junemermaid

United States981 Posts

February 12 2011 06:18 GMT

Really? Banelings melt sentries last time I checked. With map-control from zerglings, you can flank the protoss ball from whatever position you want to. If you bottle up all your units and wait for him to be at your choke, then yeah, sentries are hard to deal with. If protoss gets flanked from 3 directions to bait forcefields, then they are not really effective.

Also, its not as if the Protoss is suddenly going to have 5 void rays without the zerg player knowing. It's easy to toss up a hydra den or spire and make an adjustment.

For the OP:

I think a general framework of the build will help facilitate discussion. Such as...

Times when you scout, what to do when you scout it, and how you respond to it. You're going to get a lot of people saying "that is a weak build" or "thats so dumb [read: raven]", or "LOL 4 warp gate owns this". People are lazy and probably won't look at your replays.

I think by getting up your 3rd's and 4th's faster than usual by relying on banelings will set you up for a good mid/late game. It's Protoss' imperative to stop those expansions. From what I've seen, simple gateway pushes (read 4wg or 6gate stalker) aren't going to work. After a protoss scouts the baneling nest with whatever they SHOULD respond to it (templars or void rays). I think void rays are your biggest threat since it forces gas to be spent elsewhere that you may not want to.

For what its worth, banelings are really scary to play against. I think people overestimate how well sentries do on the offensive while in transit to the zerg players base. They aren't that great when they are out of position. They are also very gas intensive, which delays tech like a boss. Yeah, its cash when you get good forcefields, but try forcefielding on a 360 degree battlefield instead of at a choke. Any good zerg player will force Protoss players to burn forcefields en-route.

The protoss deathball is just that: a death ball. If it starts to split up then its effectiveness starts to drop drastically. I think this can be strong by focusing on banelings & infestors. Banelings are freaking fast, so they can essentially flank at a moments notice. Infestors ensure the deathball stays pretty tightly packed. The rest writes itself.

On February 12 2011 13:38 morimacil wrote:
But since there is absolutely nothing in your strategy forcing him to do that, if you actually meet a toss who understands the purpose, and more importantly, the reason for forming a deathball....
Hell, he could even make a deathball, realize that you have absolutely nothing threatening to units that arent clumped up, spread out all his forces and attack you, and you cant do anything about it :/

What? Splitting up a deathball is pretty much a sure way to lose.

EDIT: It's also pretty easy to spot protoss players that ARENT going for the deathball and adjust accordingly.

FortyOzs

189 Posts

February 12 2011 06:51 GMT

Watched the first game, and that looked beautiful. I love how many lings and banelings there are, the only weakness looks like air, which is becoming more and more popular. You can always adapt to it, and if you do get him to spread his death ball then those extra 50 zerglings have something to be attacking. Definitely worth a shot just because how awesome it is to pull off.

Ksyper

Bulgaria665 Posts

February 12 2011 07:03 GMT

#10

Well what I like in what you said is getting upgrades early for the banelings, I want to try going for the typical 2 base burrow roach so I can hold of 6 gates and then instead of going for a spire to get broodlords I'm going to use that money to get overlord upgrades, baneling upgrades, infestors and the banelings themselves. So I want to attack with my roaches, trap his army with some fungals and then move in and drop banelings while remaxing on hydras.

Ziggitz

United States340 Posts

February 12 2011 08:29 GMT

#11

II looked at this build and then decided to try it out. Been having trouble opening with lings to fend off a 4 gate even with extra queens. So I adapted it and did a roach opening that I was more comfortable with and switched over to banelings. Roaches are not food efficient but they're really gas efficient compared to banelings against smaller numbers and they do well on creep early on without speed, which banelings aren't great at.

Roaches allow me to get the lair down fast and get a quick scout in to spot the robo, templar or stargate tech and if I see robo go down it's banelings ahoy. On most maps it's easy to take out a third as they're establishing it due to the fact that you can get so many lings and banes out quickly. and anything short of high templar or colossi are just terrible at killing lings and banes quickly and zealots can be outmaneuvered.

I generally go with 4 or so infestors so that I can mind control the colossi after the banelings have hit because it allows the lings to clean up really well when they don't have to deal with it shooting them. I also like getting a lot of queens early with the roaches because you can use them for early defense, get more drones out, have some air defense and spread creep to make the banelings more effective. The creep spread is really important because it allows you to move your banelings out early, see the enemy coming and make them move faster so more of them collide instead of getting shot on the way into the deathball. With good creep spread you can keep a lot of bases protected.

Overall the concept is awesome. But anyone who uses it should know how and when to use it properly.

Lochat

United States270 Posts

February 12 2011 09:29 GMT

#12

I'm not sure if you know what larvae efficiency means. The point is, 10 larvae worth of roaches tends to be stronger than 10 larvae worth of Lings. That means, instead of using 10 larvae to make Roaches, you make, say, 5. But you need 10 Larvae worth of Lings for the same defense. That means there's 5 extra drone larvae to use.

I'm not sure how you try to argue against larvae efficiency by completely ignoring larvae efficiency. It's sorta like arguing against a unit being cost efficient by ignoring how much they actually cost.

Pwnographics

New Zealand1097 Posts

February 12 2011 09:37 GMT

#13

The baneling bomb destories the sentries and zealots within the army as well as taking out all the shields on most of the stalkers.

This will mean:

If protoss engages he will not be able to forcefield out your army to stop the surround, nor will he be able to use guardian shield. All his units will also have half the effective hit points.

Backs up - lets you macro up hard to get to a 300 food push.

Ziggitz

United States340 Posts

February 12 2011 10:07 GMT

#14

On February 12 2011 18:29 Lochat wrote:

Show nested quote +

Not if you morph them into banelings. a roach is more larva efficient than 2 lings, but not two banelings. That's 1 larva for 100/50 worth of army. Against a large ball of units that works out to be way way more efficient when you consider how many attacks a roach will get off on average before it dies to the death ball compared to how many units a baneling can splash.

morimacil

France921 Posts

February 12 2011 10:24 GMT

#15

What? Splitting up a deathball is pretty much a sure way to lose.

Not really. Its a sure way to lose if your opponent actually has something that can punish you for splitting up your units, thats true.
Against something like muta-ling, if you split up your army, then the full zerg army can engage each split up part separately, meaning that zerg wins the battles easily.
If you spread it out, then not everything is shooting at once, and lings get super nice surrounds, so its awesome for the zerg.

Just imagine for example a single zealot attacking your expo.
You are going muta-ling: Great, a free zealot!
You are going roach hydra: Great, a free zealot!
You are going infestor baneling: Uh. Use up 5 banelings to kill a single zealot? Or fungal growth it with a few infested marines?

The issue is, with other styles, any stray units are free pickings, forcing the toss units to stay together, and eventually form what we came to know as the deathball. With just infestor-bling, you dont have that.
Single colossus wandering around, away from his deathball. Against other styles: wohoo! free colossus! :D
But against bling-infestor? Using up 18 banelings to blow it up isnt really a great option.
Neural parasite and a bunch of infested tewrrans is probably the best thing to take it out, but even then, its still 175 energy from your infestors, so its still not a super awesome deal really.

Amarth

United States22 Posts

February 12 2011 10:37 GMT

#16

well said morimacil. if i see a zerg with this composition, i'm going to separate my colossi into individual groups with a few gateway units each, and strike all over his base at once. nothing he can do.

jamesmax

Canada72 Posts

February 12 2011 12:17 GMT

#17

Im sure you two above posters realize he doesnt have to morph every ling right

palanq

United States761 Posts

February 12 2011 16:04 GMT

#18

so many of your opponents read this as some kind of pre-lair allin i guess? so they get void rays, which turn out to do be really useless most of the time.

a lot of the battles you won could have gone in P's favor if they forcefielded better, or got templar/archons instead of some of these other useless units.

still seems like a pretty good style, though.

OoOo

Germany126 Posts

February 12 2011 16:37 GMT

#19

i m also a about 2800 master zerg and im using a quite similar build, so id like to correct some mistakes your post has^^

1. HT doenst work well against banelings. a baneling with speed can roll through a storm off creep and survive with 1 hp, so a toss needs multiple storms to stop banelings, making hts quite useless

2. i personally found out that adding a few queens to support your mix (like +5) allow you to
- spread creep waaay more efficient
- deal with voidrays
- allow you to use neural parasite (infestor+transfuse)
- strenghen hive tech

3. using ling/bling/queen allows you to tech to hive on 2 base, if you play on a map that blizzard made cause they hate expanding players (half joke but you know what im talking about)

Johnny_Vegas

United States239 Posts

February 12 2011 17:18 GMT

#20

I like this style, and I think it could work fine, especially since it is non-standard. It makes perfect sense to fight clumped armies with area of effect attacks. I've really been trying to figure out how to incorporate infestors in ZvP to combat the deathball protoss. I haven't focused on baneling use as much, but I've started to experiment. Colossi with gateway units concentrate so much firepower into such a small space that it is really difficult for zerg to take that on with a traditional army. If you consider a Colossi/Void/Zealot army, consists of 3 "types" of units that can occupy the same space on the battle field...

air units
normal ground
cliff walking ground, that can stand "over" normal ground.

...then we can see the incredible power of just a single fungal growth to hit a ridiculous amount of units at once. It would be possible to hit 6 voids, 8 zeals, and 2 colossus, with a single fungal, dealing 608 points of damage (16 targets x 38 damage). A single baneling actually has a splash of 2.2 versus just 2.0 for fungal, so while it couldn't hit the voids, might hit a couple more zealots producing the following damage...
10 zeals (350 damage), 2 cols (40 damage), for a total of 390 damage from a single 50/25 half supply unit.

Such is the power of area effect attacks on clumped/stacked armies. Compare that potential to the expected damage output of a roach or a hydra, or even a corruptor, and you'll see that for cost, they can't measure up.

Lets not ignore the fact that Neural Parasite on Colossus is another powerful form of area of attack for the infestor. As a hypothetical example of what Neural Parasiting a single Colossus could do, we take the Colossus DPS of 18.2, if it hits on average, just 3 protoss units per attack, it could do a total of 819 damage (15 secs * 18.2 DPS * 3 units). This only improves with target firing the center of the protoss ball, especially if the ball is tightly packed and fungaled.

This style is often going to lead to either an easy win, or a devastating loss. So fragile are banes and infestors, that it becomes primarily a battle of micro between you and your opponent. Yes its hard to neural parasite Colossus and/or Voids, but it all comes down to proper technique and good micro. Successful Neural Parasiting often involves either immobilizing the enemy with fungal, with swarms of units, or by taking advantage of terrain.

Crash 8 banelings into a single stalker? LOSS
Get 22 banelings pinned in by forcefields and shot down by Colossus? LOSS
Fungal a tightly packed ball and drop banes on to it? WIN!

One of its strengths is that you have more tools for harassing the protoss. You can try to get banelings into his probe line, you can fungal/infested terran probe lines, you can drop banes, you can burrow ambush with banes, etc...

Maxed armies of ling/bane/infestor are huge, thanks to their low supply requirements. That is not even considering the capacity of a 2 supply unit (infestor) potentially being able to spawn 8 infested terran.

I don't think we see this strategy very often because the micro requirement is so intense. Zerg already spends a lot of APM on macro, that it can be very difficult to devote the time to carefully managing an army composed of suicide bombers and spell casters.

1 2 3 Next All

Please or register to reply.

[D] ZvP an unlikely unit composition

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming