|
The idea of killing larvae based units is an idea i've mentioned to some regarding decision making during certain battles. Essentially, people think in terms of gas and minerals fairly easily. IE, don't build a hydra den in ZvZ to kill an overlord because it wastes about ~100gas which is 1 mutalisk. I find it useful also to think in terms of larvae.
Oftentimes, when fighting an opponent (of any race) one sometimes chooses to focus fire certain units. Typical examples are targeting templars in ZvP, tanks in ZvT, or lurkers in PvZ and TvZ.
What I argue is that, specifically in PvZ and TvZ, when faced w/ the common but oh-so-effective lurker/ling combo, when is it a good idea to target the lurkers and when is it not?
Despite the fact that MANY people will tell you to target the lurkers specifically (in fact almost everyone advocates lurker targeting in TvZ), I argue that oftentimes its more important to attack the zerglings because they are heavily "larvae based"
Lets take a very common example: ZvT. Its a mineral expo map (like korhal or nostalgia) and you have 8-10 marines, 2 bats, and 2 medics outside the zergs base. The zerg went 2 hatch fast lurker+ling and leaves his base w/ the standard 4 lurkers and 20-24 lings. What should terran attack?
Obviously a ling+lurker force is neutralized if either all the lurkers are killed OR all the lings are killed. Obviously 4 lurkers can't do shit to MnM since terran micro is so strong nowadays. And, 24 lings are going to do shit against a strong MMF force. Thus, I argue it is most important to try to kill all the lings off. For, 24 lings equates to 12 larvae. By killing off 24 lings, terran effectively delays the zerg much longer, as it will take longer to rebuild that many zerglings.
In the more common case, when a terran target fires the lurkers and kills them off, its only 1 larvae per lurker to replace. So, although its always nice to keep a zerg's lurker count down, the zerg will be able to rebound more quickly after losing all the lurkers as opposed to all the lings.
Or, in ZvP for example, lets say a zerg is going to rush down protoss's new natural expansion w/ fast lurker+ling, and you have about 8-9 speed zealots+1 archon outside zerg's base to delay the attack. ALSO, lets say that this expansion only has 2 morphing cannons or so, and no robo bay any time soon. Many protosses will attempt to target fire the lurkers as to prevent undetectable units from reaching their base. However, again, i think its most important to kill the lings off as quickly as possible, this will delay the attack far more than killing the lurkers.
Last ZvZ example: On Neo Forte, i have had the experience where a zerg will early expand on 12 and standard tech to mutalisks. If i have hatched in my main, i will immediately try to get 2 more hatches as quickly as possible (both at my expo naturally) and i will attempt to simply overrun my opponent w/ ling scourge. I know this will work because my opponent will be so far behind in larvae. He will oftentimes focus so much on gassing quickly at the natural, that he will be low on money for more hatcheries. Thus, although he will have more gas than i will, i'm simply producing far more units due to my larvae advantage that he cannot hold both his main and natural.
Just another aspect of thinking i thought i'd like to share : ]
|
Pretty interesting way to look at it. Sometimes I also wonder as a Terran player whether it's better to target lurkers or just attack move and let the rines target lings. The only thing you forgot is that lurkers need to first be built by building hydras and then morphed into lurkers. This makes the decision a bit harder since making lurkers takes a lot more time than lings do. I do understand your point though, but it seems more situational more than anything else. Other thing to keep in mind is that lurkers are gas intensive while lings are mineral only.
|
Day[9] fighting !!!!!!
I never thought that. I always thought attacking the lurkers would be better in tvz. Day[9] is my favorite nonkorean zerg besides mondragon and midian.
|
Interesting thoughts... In tvz I do not target fire my tanks at all.... and microing vs lurker/ling with m/m I will take what I can get whether it be lurkers or lings =D. I have never thought of zerg units in terms of lavae cost.. You say the lings are more important... However we all know economically, the lurkers are far more expensive. and take much longer to produce than just lings. When detection is limited or delayed IE: you only have scanner(limited scan) or protoss doesn't have robo... the lurkers are the bigger threat than the lings are. The zerg can simply settle for a contain and just xpo freely. Anyway I am anxious to find out how effective it is to go after the lings instead of the lurkers. I will try it out and let you know how my experience goes 
|
|
|
nice idea,
but why you think killing lings in pvz will delay him more? p will just lose his expansion if untouched lurks will reach there... no?
|
Larvae usage is also why I like savior[gm] zvt that he showed at least vs. oov in the last MSL. Oov let him get away with 3 hat mut (IIRC) -> mutalurk with no lings -> mass econ hive tech. The interesting part was midgame usage of larvae--savior stalled with mutalurk like mad, using the fewest possible larvae to keep oov from getting to his bases. Thus, he could pump the rest shamelessly into drones..
Yeah, it takes about the same amount of fire to kill 4 lings (2 larvae) as 1 lurk (1 larvae). There's a real problem with low hat styles with your lings killed, yes. 
|
it's a good thought.. but if that method were truly more efficient
we would have seen it more often in the progaming scene by now right?
|
Best Starcraft Broodwar Strategy i've ever read. Thanks day for informing us about the art of larvaes. I'll actually try to keep in mind what u said when im fighting a zerg.
|
On February 15 2006 22:26 araav wrote:
nice idea,
but why you think killing lings in pvz will delay him more? p will just lose his expansion if untouched lurks will reach there... no?
If you kill all the lings before he gets to your base then your cannons won't die. And without the lings you can still kill the lone lurker. Whereas if you kill the lurker the lings will still take out your cannons and you'll be vulnerable to the next lurks.
|
In TvZ, isn't the best way to micro is to simply kill as much as you can without losing anything? Like say if its lurk ling combo, if he burrows his lurkers too far forward and earlier before his lings come in, in that case you target 1 lurk and run away after you've killed it, killing any following lings which are too slow to turn back. However if his lings come at the same time as his lurks or before, you move out of the lurkers range and rape all the lings. I think you should just kill what you can without getting hurt.
|
On February 15 2006 23:00 skyglow1 wrote:
In TvZ, isn't the best way to micro is to simply kill as much as you can without losing anything? Like say if its lurk ling combo, if he burrows his lurkers too far forward and earlier before his lings come in, in that case you target 1 lurk and run away after you've killed it, killing any following lings which are too slow to turn back. However if his lings come at the same time as his lurks or before, you move out of the lurkers range and rape all the lings. I think you should just kill what you can without getting hurt.
yea, as a t player, i tend to agree with this. How the zerg moves his guys and in what order/position , extc, decides what i focus on. Ideally you want to get either the lurkers or the lings by themselves, but like i said, i basically react to what the zerg does.
I have never though of it in terms of larvae though, and i bet alot of people haven't. Interesting ~_~
|
On February 15 2006 22:41 [sj]tacticz wrote:
it's a good thought.. but if that method were truly more efficient
we would have seen it more often in the progaming scene by now right?
it is used! :D
i had a huge problem w/ this when playing against xellos
i would try to run around his MMF force outside my choke, and instead of attacking my lurkers, he would run directly upwards where my lings were running to try to surround, and then he'd kill all my lings. It was REALLY fucking annoying, especially considering i was 2 hatching T.T
|
I think it depends on the macro ability of the z, and battle position.
|
Well he took out your lings because he had the ability to without losing any units. Most players would have done that in that case I think?
|
as a zerg player i can concur that it is very hard to fight with lurker/ling when you only have 8 or so at any given time (because they keep dying off)
|
Actually, I find it harder to rebound when all the lurks are killed than when all the lings are killed - you said that lurks and lings become almost useless when not accompanied by other units, and you're right. But lurks take longer to make and cost more money than lings do - I could rebuild a 24 ling force off of two hatcheries in the time it took me to morph 6 lurks, and it wouldn't take me any gas. Also, lurkers are more useful by themselves, simply because they can sit burrowed and contain a terran until science vessels and tanks hit, and that buys the zerg time to recover. It's a toss-up, though (strange, considering it's TvZ). I agree that having my lings raped wouldn't be very easy to recover from, but I still think it's worse to lose such a gas-intensive unit, especially duing the midgame as zerg.
|
United States4471 Posts
In the TvZ example, I don't think you can ignore the gas factor in the targetting. While replacing a lurk may cost you less larva, it'll cost you more gas and the time it takes to hatch and morph may make up for the larva discrepancy. I also feel that Lurks w/o Lings > Lings w/o Lurks against M&M, but that's the opinion of an unskilled player so take it as you will. Every bit of gas you make the Z spend on replacing lurks takes away from the gas they'll have for teching later.
Not exactly the best post I've made in terms of clarity and organization, but thought I'd throw in some quick feedback. I'm not saying that Day is wrong, but that people shouldn't get too caught up in this new perspective and drastically change their playing. There are still other factors that remain that are very still valid and caused people to develop the general trends as they are.
|
in the PvZ with cannons warping in late: if only 2 lurks I would kill lings and 1 lurk. The archon can kill teh 2nd lurk even after its burrowed with all those lot meatshields. Plus, if you have normal cannon placement it would not be able to hit nexus without unburrowing.
|
On February 15 2006 23:53 XaI)CyRiC wrote:
In the TvZ example, I don't think you can ignore the gas factor in the targetting. While replacing a lurk may cost you less larva, it'll cost you more gas and the time it takes to hatch and morph may make up for the larva discrepancy. I also feel that Lurks w/o Lings > Lings w/o Lurks against M&M, but that's the opinion of an unskilled player so take it as you will. Every bit of gas you make the Z spend on replacing lurks takes away from the gas they'll have for teching later.
Not exactly the best post I've made in terms of clarity and organization, but thought I'd throw in some quick feedback. I'm not saying that Day is wrong, but that people shouldn't get too caught up in this new perspective and drastically change their playing. There are still other factors that remain that are very still valid and caused people to develop the general trends as they are.
excellent point
i don't intend for people to ALWAYS target my so called "larvae based units." On nostalgia for example, killing 4 lurkers early game can be game deciding, as the zerg is so crunched for gas. Again, as you say, the purpose of my post is not to create drastic changes in play, but rather to provide another cool insight
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
