|
So there's always a circle of builds in Brood War that says generally:
Aggressive > Greedy > Safe > Aggressive
For example in TvZ: fast +1 E-bay > 3 Hatch Muta > 2 Rax Academy > 2 Hatch Muta/Early Lings Attack > fast +1 E-bay
Or in ZvZ: Overpool > 9 Pool > 12 Hatch > 12 Pool > Overpool
So is there something like this for ZvP in the current 2015 metagame?
With Forge FE into +1 Sair/Speedlot being the go-to standard according to Word of God (Bisu) and every top Korean Zerg going 3 Base into Spire, there doesn't seem to be a circle there when it comes to standard opening builds.
I understand there's a lot of variation in the +1 Sair/speedlot build (how many zealots you make early, potential second Stargate, whether not to add DTs, etc.), but how do these variations (or ideas behind these variation) fit in relationship to Zerg variations in their builds?
With 3 Base Spire/5 Hatch Hydra being "officially outdated" according to ninazerg's guide, I find Zerg builds very subtle and hard to decipher when watching any non-FPV ZvP game. I mean, I get it's important to pay attention to when Protoss gets their third base and when Zerg gets their fourth base (6th Hatch), but with muta switches, lurker contains, turtling to hive tech and all that's in between, it's very confusing to make concrete sense out of the all the abstract actions of every ZvP game.
What kind of "tells" do you look for during a ZvP when figuring out the specific build/variation each player is going for in a ZvP? And can you organize all these builds/variations into simpler groups to better categorize their intent/general concept?
Or am I looking at this match-up from a completely wrong angle/Terran perspective?
|
The "Aggressive > Greedy > Safe > Aggressive" thing is very abstract. It's something I use to help people make sense out of why people play the way they do. For example, let's ask the hypothetical question: Why do Terran players go Fake Double in TvP? So to explain it, I thought it would be helpful to have a conceptual model to put different types of plays into very general categories. That way, I can explain it really simply: "It's an aggressive opening designed to take advantage of an early expanding Protoss' weakness." because the Protoss will only have one gateway for a little while, and will need to be really smart to avoid taking damage with very few dragoons. However, if there are two gateways, the Fake Double doesn't work anymore because there is no early nexus to take advantage of, and there will be more dragoons.
Not only can opening builds fall into a "Aggressive > Greedy > Safe > Aggressive" archetype, but also different builds at different stages of the game. For example, an aggressive opening for Zerg would be a 9pool. Maybe the Zerg will go with a safer opening an develop an economy in the early game in favor of doing an hydra bust in the mid-game.
A big part of ZvP is just positioning in the mid-game. The Protoss wants to take a third base as soon as possible, but will need to make sure the Zerg can't knock that base down. If the Zerg player decides to try and bully his or her way into that third base on lair-tech units and fails, then the Zerg will probably not have enough drones to keep up with the Protoss' production, and will not be able to engage the Protoss army or take new bases. If the Zerg is aggressive in the mid-game against a Protoss third-base and succeeds in taking it down, the Protoss will start to starve out.
Many Protoss builds are designed around the objective of getting their third base up, and this usually relies on aggression against the Zerg to force the Zerg player to spent units defending and use larvae to make units instead of drones, thus delaying the Zerg economy.
Additionally, the Zerg player will likely not want to get their mid-game army chewed up by psi storms. So, they will avoid engaging if possible until they have lurkers and/or hive tech.
Zerg opens 9pool against Protoss Fast Expand - Zerg is the aggressor, Protoss has to play safe Zerg opens 9pool against 1-base Protoss - Zerg is the aggressor, but Protoss is already playing safe
Zerg opens with overpool or hatchery against Protoss Fast Expand - Both players are playing safe; nothing happens till later Zerg opens with overpool or hatchery against Protoss double gateways - Protoss is the aggressor, Zerg has to play safe
Zerg goes 2-base mutalisk or 2-base hydralisk against Protoss Fast Expand - Zerg is the aggressor, Protoss has to make cannons and play safe Zerg goes 3-base ling all-in or 3-base hydra bust against Protoss Fast Expand - Zerg is the aggressor, Protoss has to play safe
Zerg goes 3-hatch spire into 6-hatch hydra, Protoss goes double gateway - Generally, in this case, double expanding for the Zerg will cause them to be overwhelmed by the Protoss units, which is why Zerg needs to scout to make sure the Protoss is fast expanding before double expanding to counter it. Therefore, Protoss will be the aggressor and Zerg will have already played too greedy. Zerg goes 3-hatch spire into 6-hatch hydra, Protoss goes Fast Expand into any corsair/speed zealot timing - Protoss is the aggressor, Zerg has to play safe Protoss does any kind of corsair/reaver or dragoon/reaver timing - Protoss is the aggressor, Zerg has to play safe
Zerg goes 3-hatch spire into 6-hatch hydra, but loses economy from Protoss harass - Going into the late game, Zerg has to play safe, Protoss has map control Zerg goes 3-hatch spire into 6-hatch hydra, deflects timing attack but Protoss takes a third - Going into the late game, Zerg and Protoss will have relatively even map control Zerg goes 3-hatch spire into 6-hatch hydra, kills Protoss third - Going into the late game, the Zerg can choose to either continue to be aggressive, but since the Protoss will likely build more gateways, the Protoss will be either safe or aggressive, so the Zerg player's best bet is to play safe and go up to hive. The Protoss will only have enough money to make mostly tier-1 units (such as zealot and dragoon), and hive-tech units will be too strong for a low-tech Protoss army. By the time the Protoss regenerates his or her army, the Zerg will likely have too much economy and too many units for the Protoss to win.
If the Zerg does a Zergling run-by early in the game, it will almost certainly put the Protoss behind in terms of tech timing. Tech timing is extremely important for Protoss in PvZ, so this will likely force the Protoss to play defensively at a point in the game where they want to be aggressive with zealots and/or corsairs. Without being able to mount this sort of aggression, the Protoss will only be able to watch in horror as the Zerg builds up a huge economy.
|
Kind of off topic since this is a ZvP thread, but I think that's a misunderstanding of FD. If protoss 1 gate expands, FD *can* do damage against weaker players, but it really shouldn't against well micro'd goons. You could even say that 1 gate FE is a counter to FD, because if protoss defends well, then they will be ahead economically and in timing when transitioning to the mid-game. (Although the push still gains temporary map control.)
Against 2 gate, FD won't deal damage to protoss, but it can create space with mines to defend terran's earlier expansion, putting terran ahead. Also, FD is somewhat safe against DT openings thanks to the early mines, and the push allows terran to scout for nexus timing and prepare for other aggressive 1 base protoss builds. Terran players should go fake double to gain map control and safely expand, not to deal damage (at least against equally skilled opponents who they can't out-micro.)
|
On June 02 2015 08:16 Sero wrote: Kind of off topic since this is a ZvP thread, but I think that's a misunderstanding of FD. If protoss 1 gate expands, FD *can* do damage against weaker players, but it really shouldn't against well micro'd goons. You could even say that 1 gate FE is a counter to FD, because if protoss defends well, then they will be ahead economically and in timing when transitioning to the mid-game. (Although the push still gains temporary map control.)
Against 2 gate, FD won't deal damage to protoss, but it can create space with mines to defend terran's earlier expansion, putting terran ahead. Also, FD is somewhat safe against DT openings thanks to the early mines, and the push allows terran to scout for nexus timing and prepare for other aggressive 1 base protoss builds. Terran players should go fake double to gain map control and safely expand, not to deal damage (at least against equally skilled opponents who they can't out-micro.)
That's why I say the 'circle of builds' is kind of vague. A notable exception to this game theory is 2-fact (aggressive) versus 12 nexus (greedy). I remember when people started doing 12 nex, and Terrans were raging and going "What, 2 fact doesn't beat this? Fuckin' Protoss imba" because it defied logic from a circle of builds perspective.
I should also know that aggression > greedy > safe > aggressive are not 'hard counters'. Furthermore, if one player does one build, and another player does a counter build, it's not a guaranteed win. It is just theoretically going to put the player with the stronger build ahead. Some aggressive builds require a lot of micro to do the necessary damage, and can fail spectacularly if performed incorrectly.
In the case of a double gate dragoon build, usually the Protoss is trying to be aggressive and delay the CC from floating down to the natural. So technically, it is an 'aggressive' play, and if both players are simultaneously aggressive, then neither player with have an advantage from a build order perspective. The Terran can't use the fake double to kill goons or probes, and the Protoss can't attack onto the map without risking running over mines. Again, though, this isn't a cut-and-dry thing.
|
|
On June 02 2015 11:18 ninazerg wrote:
"In the case of a double gate dragoon build, usually the Protoss is trying to be aggressive and delay the CC from floating down to the natural " "if both players are simultaneously aggressive, then neither player with have an advantage from a build order perspective" "The Terran can't use the fake double to kill goons or probes, and the Protoss can't attack onto the map without risking running over mines. Again, though, this isn't a cut-and-dry thing."
1st quote : The protoss opens 2Gateway goon to gain map control, be aggressive, and hopefully delay the Terrans CC / just steam roll over the Terran. I don't even think people still siege expand so floating the CC down will be less common.
2nd quote : If both players are opening with aggressive build orders, it is inevitable that they will most likely not be playing identical in terms of speed / effeciency, which in turn is going to leave one of the players with a slight advantage due to each players macro, that is what StarCraft is about, a game of mistakes.
3rd quote : The potentialities of what the Terran and Protoss can and can't do are simply dependant on the Terran / Protoss skill level, and execution, there is no "can't" in this game, as we see time and time again Dragoons clear mine fields without vision, and Terrans control their units extremely well in order to do damage when it is said that they "can't"
Essentially some of what you said is true, the other half is actually not true in the slightest, and most likely you are just saying because you believe you are omniscient...
The guy is right as well .... Aggressive ( 9pool speedling / overpool / 9pool / ect.)
-->Greedy (Taking 3rd as another natural expansion to make your economy snowball / gain map control / positional control
-->Safe (Going into 3 hatch Spire to defend against Corsairs (+1 possibly) , with your (+1 scourge possibly) , Sometimes it will immediatly go back into aggressive very fast if the Zerg decides to attempt to gain air superiority with Muta + Scourge, other than that the Zerg is being safe from corsairs, and while going scourage and or Muta, the Zerg is teching into Lurker to start a very passive / camping style of Lurker / spine / spore until he can max out on ultralisks, which would then be considered going back into the aggressive stage. Although a lot of the time the Zerg will go straight from 3 hatch spire into 5 hatch Hydra and skip lurkers until after the Hydras, and in this situation it would be going staight back into the aggressive role.
--->Aggressive ( This is after you have your 3rd base up, SAFE from any sort of mass speed zealot attack (potentially with or without an early archon, at this point there is usually no way for the Protoss to bust down your 3rd or natural expansion, so the Zerg player now uses his economic advantage to shoot forward outmacroing the Protoss, and once again attempting to gain control of the map and the game in terms of aggression, normally the Zerg will be going for a Hydra / Lurker composition while teching into Ultralisks, defilers, and nydus network to connect natural / main to 3rd. While pushing wtih the Hydra / Lurker the Zerg will continue to use his air superiority ( scourges / mutas ) to maintain air superiority, and snipe High Templars as much as possible in order to make the Zerg ground army sustain longer, which will in turn give the Zerg a much greater advantage.
So yes essentially, I think the OP is 100% correct.
|
On June 02 2015 08:16 Sero wrote:
Against 2 gate, FD won't deal damage to protoss, but it can create space with mines to defend terran's earlier expansion, putting terran ahead. Also, FD is somewhat safe against DT openings thanks to the early mines, and the push allows terran to scout for nexus timing and prepare for other aggressive 1 base protoss builds. Terran players should go fake double to gain map control and safely expand, not to deal damage (at least against equally skilled opponents who they can't out-micro.)
The strength of FD vs normal Protoss openings is indeed the mines, like you said. But you should also consider that if a 12 nexus is scouted, an FD opening lets the Terran reactively bunker rush.
|
On June 02 2015 15:06 GGzerG wrote:Show nested quote +On June 02 2015 11:18 ninazerg wrote:
"In the case of a double gate dragoon build, usually the Protoss is trying to be aggressive and delay the CC from floating down to the natural " "if both players are simultaneously aggressive, then neither player with have an advantage from a build order perspective" "The Terran can't use the fake double to kill goons or probes, and the Protoss can't attack onto the map without risking running over mines. Again, though, this isn't a cut-and-dry thing." 1st quote : The protoss opens 2Gateway goon to gain map control, be aggressive, and hopefully delay the Terrans CC / just steam roll over the Terran. I don't even think people still siege expand so floating the CC down will be less common.
"This doesn't happen often, therefore your point is invalid" is a terrible way to start making a point.
2nd quote : If both players are opening with aggressive build orders, it is inevitable that they will most likely not be playing identical in terms of speed / effeciency, which in turn is going to leave one of the players with a slight advantage due to each players macro, that is what StarCraft is about, a game of mistakes.
No shit.
On June 02 2015 11:18 ninazerg wrote: Furthermore, if one player does one build, and another player does a counter build, it's not a guaranteed win. It is just theoretically going to put the player with the stronger build ahead. Some aggressive builds require a lot of micro to do the necessary damage, and can fail spectacularly if performed incorrectly.
I wish I had said the above quote to clarify, but alas, I did not.
3rd quote : The potentialities of what the Terran and Protoss can and can't do are simply dependant on the Terran / Protoss skill level, and execution, there is no "can't" in this game, as we see time and time again Dragoons clear mine fields without vision, and Terrans control their units extremely well in order to do damage when it is said that they "can't"
*dependent
That is a bit of miscommunication on my part, but if you read it in context with the rest of the words I wrote, it might make sense to a normal human being with a brain. I'm not saying it definitely will, but I hold people's common sense and intelligence in high esteem on the Teamliquid message boards. By "can't", I'm saying "generally, will probably not".
Essentially some of what you said is true, the other half is actually not true in the slightest, and most likely you are just saying because you believe you are omniscient...
...ze fuck
+ Show Spoiler + The guy is right as well .... Aggressive ( 9pool speedling / overpool / 9pool / ect.)
-->Greedy (Taking 3rd as another natural expansion to make your economy snowball / gain map control / positional control
-->Safe (Going into 3 hatch Spire to defend against Corsairs (+1 possibly) , with your (+1 scourge possibly) , Sometimes it will immediatly go back into aggressive very fast if the Zerg decides to attempt to gain air superiority with Muta + Scourge, other than that the Zerg is being safe from corsairs, and while going scourage and or Muta, the Zerg is teching into Lurker to start a very passive / camping style of Lurker / spine / spore until he can max out on ultralisks, which would then be considered going back into the aggressive stage. Although a lot of the time the Zerg will go straight from 3 hatch spire into 5 hatch Hydra and skip lurkers until after the Hydras, and in this situation it would be going staight back into the aggressive role.
--->Aggressive ( This is after you have your 3rd base up, SAFE from any sort of mass speed zealot attack (potentially with or without an early archon, at this point there is usually no way for the Protoss to bust down your 3rd or natural expansion, so the Zerg player now uses his economic advantage to shoot forward outmacroing the Protoss, and once again attempting to gain control of the map and the game in terms of aggression, normally the Zerg will be going for a Hydra / Lurker composition while teching into Ultralisks, defilers, and nydus network to connect natural / main to 3rd. While pushing wtih the Hydra / Lurker the Zerg will continue to use his air superiority ( scourges / mutas ) to maintain air superiority, and snipe High Templars as much as possible in order to make the Zerg ground army sustain longer, which will in turn give the Zerg a much greater advantage.
So yes essentially, I think the OP is 100% correct.
Subtle balance whine.
|
HyralGambit, what is your main race? I suspect it is terran, but still... Also is the purpose to get better in ZvP (as z) vs random protoss opponents with no/irrelevant history or just get a better understanding of how the matchup should work like, which could used for better viewer experience for example? If the purpose is to get better just focus on three things: 1. study the map well; 2. perform build orders as perfect as possible, and 3. given the map knowledge and the build order - know and achieve your ingame targets/goals without messing up the build order significantly. I can give you 100 combos of zvp early/mid game build orders and all are as good as they are being performed. It's usually pretty hard to perform them so well as more minerals are being gathered quicker than in the other z mus and there are so many tiny stuff to pay significant attention to. fwiw, I consider 4pool a complete all-in in zvp whereas I semi-jokingly describe 5pool as a macro build order. 5pool can be turned into such an awesome macro zvp build that it could be described plausibly as aggressive and greedy and safe.
i hope you get the idea
|
On June 03 2015 05:45 ninazerg wrote:Show nested quote +On June 02 2015 15:06 GGzerG wrote:On June 02 2015 11:18 ninazerg wrote:
"In the case of a double gate dragoon build, usually the Protoss is trying to be aggressive and delay the CC from floating down to the natural " "if both players are simultaneously aggressive, then neither player with have an advantage from a build order perspective" "The Terran can't use the fake double to kill goons or probes, and the Protoss can't attack onto the map without risking running over mines. Again, though, this isn't a cut-and-dry thing." 1st quote : The protoss opens 2Gateway goon to gain map control, be aggressive, and hopefully delay the Terrans CC / just steam roll over the Terran. I don't even think people still siege expand so floating the CC down will be less common. "This doesn't happen often, therefore your point is invalid" is a terrible way to start making a point. Show nested quote + 2nd quote : If both players are opening with aggressive build orders, it is inevitable that they will most likely not be playing identical in terms of speed / effeciency, which in turn is going to leave one of the players with a slight advantage due to each players macro, that is what StarCraft is about, a game of mistakes.
No shit. Show nested quote +On June 02 2015 11:18 ninazerg wrote: Furthermore, if one player does one build, and another player does a counter build, it's not a guaranteed win. It is just theoretically going to put the player with the stronger build ahead. Some aggressive builds require a lot of micro to do the necessary damage, and can fail spectacularly if performed incorrectly.
I wish I had said the above quote to clarify, but alas, I did not. Show nested quote + 3rd quote : The potentialities of what the Terran and Protoss can and can't do are simply dependant on the Terran / Protoss skill level, and execution, there is no "can't" in this game, as we see time and time again Dragoons clear mine fields without vision, and Terrans control their units extremely well in order to do damage when it is said that they "can't"
*dependent That is a bit of miscommunication on my part, but if you read it in context with the rest of the words I wrote, it might make sense to a normal human being with a brain. I'm not saying it definitely will, but I hold people's common sense and intelligence in high esteem on the Teamliquid message boards. By "can't", I'm saying "generally, will probably not". Show nested quote + Essentially some of what you said is true, the other half is actually not true in the slightest, and most likely you are just saying because you believe you are omniscient...
...ze fuck Show nested quote ++ Show Spoiler + The guy is right as well .... Aggressive ( 9pool speedling / overpool / 9pool / ect.)
-->Greedy (Taking 3rd as another natural expansion to make your economy snowball / gain map control / positional control
-->Safe (Going into 3 hatch Spire to defend against Corsairs (+1 possibly) , with your (+1 scourge possibly) , Sometimes it will immediatly go back into aggressive very fast if the Zerg decides to attempt to gain air superiority with Muta + Scourge, other than that the Zerg is being safe from corsairs, and while going scourage and or Muta, the Zerg is teching into Lurker to start a very passive / camping style of Lurker / spine / spore until he can max out on ultralisks, which would then be considered going back into the aggressive stage. Although a lot of the time the Zerg will go straight from 3 hatch spire into 5 hatch Hydra and skip lurkers until after the Hydras, and in this situation it would be going staight back into the aggressive role.
--->Aggressive ( This is after you have your 3rd base up, SAFE from any sort of mass speed zealot attack (potentially with or without an early archon, at this point there is usually no way for the Protoss to bust down your 3rd or natural expansion, so the Zerg player now uses his economic advantage to shoot forward outmacroing the Protoss, and once again attempting to gain control of the map and the game in terms of aggression, normally the Zerg will be going for a Hydra / Lurker composition while teching into Ultralisks, defilers, and nydus network to connect natural / main to 3rd. While pushing wtih the Hydra / Lurker the Zerg will continue to use his air superiority ( scourges / mutas ) to maintain air superiority, and snipe High Templars as much as possible in order to make the Zerg ground army sustain longer, which will in turn give the Zerg a much greater advantage.
So yes essentially, I think the OP is 100% correct.
Subtle balance whine.
Maybe we should play a game, and afterwards you can share the replay with the OP, that way you may be able to elaborate on your theory crafting a little better. Although, I am not sure you will be able to execute the theories that you strategize about.
|
On June 04 2015 01:23 GGzerG wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2015 05:45 ninazerg wrote:On June 02 2015 15:06 GGzerG wrote:On June 02 2015 11:18 ninazerg wrote:
"In the case of a double gate dragoon build, usually the Protoss is trying to be aggressive and delay the CC from floating down to the natural " "if both players are simultaneously aggressive, then neither player with have an advantage from a build order perspective" "The Terran can't use the fake double to kill goons or probes, and the Protoss can't attack onto the map without risking running over mines. Again, though, this isn't a cut-and-dry thing." 1st quote : The protoss opens 2Gateway goon to gain map control, be aggressive, and hopefully delay the Terrans CC / just steam roll over the Terran. I don't even think people still siege expand so floating the CC down will be less common. "This doesn't happen often, therefore your point is invalid" is a terrible way to start making a point. 2nd quote : If both players are opening with aggressive build orders, it is inevitable that they will most likely not be playing identical in terms of speed / effeciency, which in turn is going to leave one of the players with a slight advantage due to each players macro, that is what StarCraft is about, a game of mistakes.
No shit. On June 02 2015 11:18 ninazerg wrote: Furthermore, if one player does one build, and another player does a counter build, it's not a guaranteed win. It is just theoretically going to put the player with the stronger build ahead. Some aggressive builds require a lot of micro to do the necessary damage, and can fail spectacularly if performed incorrectly.
I wish I had said the above quote to clarify, but alas, I did not. 3rd quote : The potentialities of what the Terran and Protoss can and can't do are simply dependant on the Terran / Protoss skill level, and execution, there is no "can't" in this game, as we see time and time again Dragoons clear mine fields without vision, and Terrans control their units extremely well in order to do damage when it is said that they "can't"
*dependent That is a bit of miscommunication on my part, but if you read it in context with the rest of the words I wrote, it might make sense to a normal human being with a brain. I'm not saying it definitely will, but I hold people's common sense and intelligence in high esteem on the Teamliquid message boards. By "can't", I'm saying "generally, will probably not". Essentially some of what you said is true, the other half is actually not true in the slightest, and most likely you are just saying because you believe you are omniscient...
...ze fuck + Show Spoiler + The guy is right as well .... Aggressive ( 9pool speedling / overpool / 9pool / ect.)
-->Greedy (Taking 3rd as another natural expansion to make your economy snowball / gain map control / positional control
-->Safe (Going into 3 hatch Spire to defend against Corsairs (+1 possibly) , with your (+1 scourge possibly) , Sometimes it will immediatly go back into aggressive very fast if the Zerg decides to attempt to gain air superiority with Muta + Scourge, other than that the Zerg is being safe from corsairs, and while going scourage and or Muta, the Zerg is teching into Lurker to start a very passive / camping style of Lurker / spine / spore until he can max out on ultralisks, which would then be considered going back into the aggressive stage. Although a lot of the time the Zerg will go straight from 3 hatch spire into 5 hatch Hydra and skip lurkers until after the Hydras, and in this situation it would be going staight back into the aggressive role.
--->Aggressive ( This is after you have your 3rd base up, SAFE from any sort of mass speed zealot attack (potentially with or without an early archon, at this point there is usually no way for the Protoss to bust down your 3rd or natural expansion, so the Zerg player now uses his economic advantage to shoot forward outmacroing the Protoss, and once again attempting to gain control of the map and the game in terms of aggression, normally the Zerg will be going for a Hydra / Lurker composition while teching into Ultralisks, defilers, and nydus network to connect natural / main to 3rd. While pushing wtih the Hydra / Lurker the Zerg will continue to use his air superiority ( scourges / mutas ) to maintain air superiority, and snipe High Templars as much as possible in order to make the Zerg ground army sustain longer, which will in turn give the Zerg a much greater advantage.
So yes essentially, I think the OP is 100% correct.
Subtle balance whine. gg re?
|
I don't want to make a new thread since I think it will be appropriate to ask here.
If 3 hatch spire into 5 hatch hydra is pretty much outdated, what are some of the newer strategies that zergs use?
I'm a zerg player myself and I've been having trouble identifying the main points of a zerg's strategy in the midgame especially. What I've been seeing so far is 2 different mid game strategies. One revolves around making mass hydras and just trying to outright kill the protoss while generally attacking as fast as possible to do as much damage before storm is researched (standard play, not the 3hatch hydra bust). The second plan consists of playing very defensively, taking as many bases as possible with lurkers/sunkens as defense and ultimately swarming the protoss with tons of zerglings and lurkers and finally overpowering him by adding ultralisks.
Now to be honest, I've not seen a lot of pro zerg players being able to stop a protoss from taking a third or even a fourth. Maybe someone has a few games where the zerg actively tries to achieve this? I've been watching many games of Effort, Larva and Hero and they just seem helpless to stop a protoss from taking a third and a fourth. What I also don't understand is: when I see these zergs going for midgame aggression with hydralisks they often don't add any mutalisks to snipe high templars. Even though I guess this was a core aspect of the 3hatch spire into 5 hatch hydra build. Why do they not do this anymore?
To summarize: What should my main mentality be in the midgame as a zerg player? How should this change versus some very common plays such as: very heavy corsair play, +1 speedzealot (so no corsairs),... (I don't know many builds :p)?
|
On June 04 2015 20:30 B-royal wrote:
If 3 hatch spire into 5 hatch hydra is pretty much outdated, what are some of the newer strategies that zergs use? It's not outdated. BW doesn't work that way, and even if it has fallen out of favor in the top levels of FISH play, nothing has changed balance wise since zergs were taking OSLs and MSLs with that build. If you learn to execute this build properly you will improve, not by switching up to something more popular.
I've been away from BW for some time so I have no idea what's popular right now, but your goal should be to learn to execute and understand a well optimized build, not to switch to whatever is popular.
No offense to the people posting in this thread, but all of them are for all intents and purposes scrubs, like myself, they are C+ at best. You should NEVER assume whatever a player is doing (in game) or is saying on a forum (teamliquid) to be correct, even progamers, the only exceptions are Flash, Bisu and Jaedong (and a half a dozen of others), you'll learn a 100 tines more by watching their 4-6 year old VODs than listening to Ninazerg, no offense to Nina as she's probably a better player than myself, but in the grand scheme of things she still sucks.
TLDR; Take everything you read here with a mountain of salt, watching top player FPVODs of Afreeca, or old VODs of Flash, Bisu and Jaedong, would probably be better for you.
Edit: Technics is poating in this thread, a lot better than C+, but my point still stands, you shouldn't be basing your learning on what you hear on an internet forum, it's a good way to eventually hit a brick wall and stagnate.
|
I want to point out that is very very hard to learn from Jaedong and Bisu, because their mechanics are so good that you'll have a hard time emulating them, but from educational purposes Stork and Zero are really good, i honestly think that Stork was strategically better than Bisu, and i definitely recommend him over Bisu to learn to play Toss. Flash was the Great Master of Terrans :D.
TLDR: Watch old vods of Stork
|
Very interesting thread, trolls and useless posts aside.
I've also got a question. According to convention we should stop producing scourges to combat sairs once they've built more than but lately I've been seeing zergs dumping all their gas into scourges, making up to 10 to 20 or so, to combat sairs instead of making hydras so that they'd at least have a ground army.
I've seen games where massing scourges failed completely or balanced out normally, while I've also seen games where massing hydras is enough to defend against sairs.
Can someone please explain?
On June 05 2015 00:33 thezanursic wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2015 20:30 B-royal wrote:
If 3 hatch spire into 5 hatch hydra is pretty much outdated, what are some of the newer strategies that zergs use? It's not outdated. BW doesn't work that way, and even if it has fallen out of favor in the top levels of FISH play, nothing has changed balance wise since zergs were taking OSLs and MSLs with that build. If you learn to execute this build properly you will improve, not by switching up to something more popular. I've been away from BW for some time so I have no idea what's popular right now, but your goal should be to learn to execute and understand a well optimized build, not to switch to whatever is popular. No offense to the people posting in this thread, but all of them are for all intents and purposes scrubs, like myself, they are C+ at best. You should NEVER assume whatever a player is doing (in game) or is saying on a forum (teamliquid) to be correct, even progamers, the only exceptions are Flash, Bisu and Jaedong (and a half a dozen of others), you'll learn a 100 tines more by watching their 4-6 year old VODs than listening to Ninazerg, no offense to Nina as she's probably a better player than myself, but in the grand scheme of things she still sucks. TLDR; Take everything you read here with a mountain of salt, watching top player FPVODs of Afreeca, or old VODs of Flash, Bisu and Jaedong, would probably be better for you. Edit: Technics is poating in this thread, a lot better than C+, but my point still stands, you shouldn't be basing your learning on what you hear on an internet forum, it's a good way to eventually hit a brick wall and stagnate.
You're not helping at all. Your advice is bad and irrelevant and you obviously didn't read properly. OP said he doesn't understand games when he watches them. Nor do many of us. B-royal also asked a very simple question out of curiosity. Builds are popular for a reason.
And you're wrong. Even a D+ can help a D to improve. They've beat everyone else at D for a reason. Without internet forums and day9 i'd still be a clueless E player.
|
Hello HyralGambit.
I understand there's a lot of variation in the +1 Sair/speedlot build (how many zealots you make early, potential second Stargate, whether not to add DTs, etc.), but how do these variations (or ideas behind these variation) fit in relationship to Zerg variations in their builds?
I class "1 star citadel" separately from "2 star" as they are different enough. But either way the things you mention are choices that Protoss gets to make (as long as Zerg is going 3 base spire to 5/6 hat). Protoss gets to choose freely if he makes 6-12 zealots roughly, if he makes 2-4 dts roughly, or indeed if he wants to go 2 star instead and attempt to take air dominance. Choosing between 1 or 2 stargates is a major choice but its not dictated by the Zerg, its a pre decided game plan. The other choices (number of zealots and dts) are minor choices and are also not dictated by the Zerg, and usually is pre decided game plan aswell. Ofcourse if the Zerg is zergling heavy, and you had originally planned to poke with only 6 zealots, then you would be wise to adapt by hanging back. Likewise if you had planned to attack to with 12 zealots but see he is slow to add sunkens and lings, you might move out a little sooner.
But these are minor things. The most important thing to identify is 5 hat or 6 hat before hydra den. Use sairs to scout the nat or the 3rd. If you see the 4th/5th hat being made and then the hydra den/evo being made soon after, then you know its 5 hat. If you dont see hydra den/evo being made soon after, and instead see a creep colony most likely, then it is 6 hat.
Next you want to identify if Zerg is going muta first, hydra first, or lurker first. He will make some scourge regardless, if your first corsair dies, it is more likely that he will reactively decide to go muta first and get air armour, mass scourge and take air dominance. If you lose your first sair you can make a decision to completely halt sair production, but I advise to continue making them.
Protoss makes 4 ht. Keep them as templar until the moment you see mutas. As soon as mutas are seen, make 2 archons. Some pros try to skimp and use storm vs the muta instead. It never works. Tyson said in an interview that he thinks he is able to use storm in practice house but in televised games he wasnt able to, and lost games on this decision. This is assuming Muta first (before hydras or lurkers). If Zerg gets mutas after hydras or lurkers, then I still recommend getting 2 archons straight away, but you can use 4 of your more recent ht with low energy. I also recommend immediately starting more sair production even if you already have 7. If Zerg is trying to seize air control with muta/mass scourge, then you Will lose some sairs. Relying on archons is not safe. In this scenario it is best to boost sairs, so this means go up to 9 or 10 sairs and keep replenishing if you drop below that. I would say the muta +1 air armour is not as common as hydra first though.
-Hydra speed. This is the biggest threat that Protoss has to worry about out of the 3 choices (muta hydra or lurker). Your sairs will see hydras being made at the Zerg 3rd or nat. Once you identify this, keep your HT as HT, dont morph archon. Unfortunately the threat of hydra/ling is so great that I dont think its safe to take 'early' 3rd nexus even if it was 6 hat before hydra den. Once Protoss scouts a 6 hat build, he could choose to make 3rd nexus after 4 gates for example. Some pros do this and sometimes they are successful. However, often times they are not. Zerg is able to scout the 3rd nexus timing and reactively shut it down either with lings or hydra on most maps. In some ways this makes it simple for the Protoss though, because my recommendation is to always go to 6 gates before 3rd nexus. I would like to be able to offer a rule such as 'If you scout 6 hat, you can make 3rd nexus on only 2-5 gates, with 8-14 zealots depending on map and scouted Zergling counts etc' but I cant even confidently be that vague. Its a big issue. Sometimes Protoss does take an early 3rd base but by the time the production kicks in, Zerg snipes it and snowballs from there. The only tips I have are dedicate your zealot and ht to securing the 3rd base, dont try to make cannons and third nexus without a proper squad of zealots and 3 or 4 ht to support otherwise it can very easily get forced to cancel and the delay snowballs. Also, once you have a 3rd nexus, you have to keep 2 ht there at all times going up to 3 and a few zealots later as well. Thats a tip I strongly recommend.
-Lurker, if you scout that Zerg has made lurkers first (before speed hydra or muta) then the variation is nice and simple. Make your robo now. It should be after 4 gates, rather than the usual after 6 gates. Also, immediately make 2 cannons at the 3rd base location before you make the nexus and send zealots there, positioned ahead of the cannons to intercept a possible lurker attack on the planned 3rd nexus location. Expect this attack as well. Make a 3rd cannon further back before nexus too. The priority is getting one cannon to finish so that you have detection, thats all that matters. However, many times lurker first is used purely defensively, with Zerg making 4 lurkers at his nat and 4 at his 3rd. Your zealot poke should identify this, and you sometimes have an opportunity to do damage before the lurkers have set up. Generally I recommend not commiting to attacks. Its a pretty tight window most of the time, so hanging back is fine. Protoss can assume that a hive and crackling style is being prepared, but speed hydras or mutas can come out next instead. Therefore, its similar to the advice where I said go to 6 gates regardless of what Zerg does. In this case Im saying continue to mass. This means make 18 goons and 2 forges. Dont rush getting 3 forges, a 4th nexus and only 10 goons. Again, some pros do this and sometimes it works very nicely, but is no way to reliably scout Zerg tech switches such that you can reactively compensate to such a degree.
The variations that Protoss can get away with are things like pausing a round of production momentarily, small things like that rather than make 4th nexus while only on 12 goons. This may be surprising but I actually think the best way to approach PvZ as Protoss is not to be particularly flexible, and instead be quite rigid, making what I call the Hammer which is 18-24 dragoon back bone army at a predictable specific time. This may sound really boring and complete opposite of what a strategy game should be, I just genuinely think its the most reliable way to win consistently. The game plan is the smash every attempt Zerg makes to take a 5th and 6th base, while getting 4 bases and 10 gates. Thats the basic end game scenario. Things are going well if these goals are accomplished. If Zerg takes a 5th and 6th base successfully you are even. Mix in reavers, take a 5th base and get an archon backbone of 12 archons. Ofcourse easier said than done but what I mean is that many players push late game attacks too far and their archon count is always kept in check as a result.
But anyway, you basically want to learn PvZ but the only way to really learn is to watch lots of games. Out of the current players Effort, Zero, Bisu, Free, Snow, Tyson, Shuttle are a good start. Its also really helpful to have an example game that is the baseline for the most solid standard strategy. For that I choose this game, I strongly recommend it, its brilliant: + Show Spoiler +Sonic's 11th SBENU OnGameNet Starleague Round of 24 Group A May 24 2015 + Show Spoiler +(P)Free vs (Z)Effort on Neo Jade Effort goes 6 hat, the game goes to late game.
To demonstrate how the same build can win quickly check this one out: + Show Spoiler +Seaside Super Tournament Ro8 April 29th 2015 + Show Spoiler +(P)Tyson vs (Z)Effort on FS Effort goes 6 hat and wins with his first hydra poke. (Note the game is not 40 minutes long, the vod has 2 games in it).
Note I just sat down and wrote this in one sitting and it ended up longer than I initially intended, I haven’t proof read it or anything.
|
On June 06 2015 03:46 CardinalAllin wrote:Hello HyralGambit. Show nested quote +I understand there's a lot of variation in the +1 Sair/speedlot build (how many zealots you make early, potential second Stargate, whether not to add DTs, etc.), but how do these variations (or ideas behind these variation) fit in relationship to Zerg variations in their builds? I class "1 star citadel" separately from "2 star" as they are different enough. But either way the things you mention are choices that Protoss gets to make (as long as Zerg is going 3 base spire to 5/6 hat). Protoss gets to choose freely if he makes 6-12 zealots roughly, if he makes 2-4 dts roughly, or indeed if he wants to go 2 star instead and attempt to take air dominance. Choosing between 1 or 2 stargates is a major choice but its not dictated by the Zerg, its a pre decided game plan. The other choices (number of zealots and dts) are minor choices and are also not dictated by the Zerg, and usually is pre decided game plan aswell. Ofcourse if the Zerg is zergling heavy, and you had originally planned to poke with only 6 zealots, then you would be wise to adapt by hanging back. Likewise if you had planned to attack to with 12 zealots but see he is slow to add sunkens and lings, you might move out a little sooner. But these are minor things. The most important thing to identify is 5 hat or 6 hat before hydra den. Use sairs to scout the nat or the 3rd. If you see the 4th/5th hat being made and then the hydra den/evo being made soon after, then you know its 5 hat. If you dont see hydra den/evo being made soon after, and instead see a creep colony most likely, then it is 6 hat. Next you want to identify if Zerg is going muta first, hydra first, or lurker first. He will make some scourge regardless, if your first corsair dies, it is more likely that he will reactively decide to go muta first and get air armour, mass scourge and take air dominance. If you lose your first sair you can make a decision to completely halt sair production, but I advise to continue making them. Protoss makes 4 ht. Keep them as templar until the moment you see mutas. As soon as mutas are seen, make 2 archons. Some pros try to skimp and use storm vs the muta instead. It never works. Tyson said in an interview that he thinks he is able to use storm in practice house but in televised games he wasnt able to, and lost games on this decision. This is assuming Muta first (before hydras or lurkers). If Zerg gets mutas after hydras or lurkers, then I still recommend getting 2 archons straight away, but you can use 4 of your more recent ht with low energy. I also recommend immediately starting more sair production even if you already have 7. If Zerg is trying to seize air control with muta/mass scourge, then you Will lose some sairs. Relying on archons is not safe. In this scenario it is best to boost sairs, so this means go up to 9 or 10 sairs and keep replenishing if you drop below that. I would say the muta +1 air armour is not as common as hydra first though. -Hydra speed. This is the biggest threat that Protoss has to worry about out of the 3 choices (muta hydra or lurker). Your sairs will see hydras being made at the Zerg 3rd or nat. Once you identify this, keep your HT as HT, dont morph archon. Unfortunately the threat of hydra/ling is so great that I dont think its safe to take 'early' 3rd nexus even if it was 6 hat before hydra den. Once Protoss scouts a 6 hat build, he could choose to make 3rd nexus after 4 gates for example. Some pros do this and sometimes they are successful. However, often times they are not. Zerg is able to scout the 3rd nexus timing and reactively shut it down either with lings or hydra on most maps. In some ways this makes it simple for the Protoss though, because my recommendation is to always go to 6 gates before 3rd nexus. I would like to be able to offer a rule such as 'If you scout 6 hat, you can make 3rd nexus on only 2-5 gates, with 8-14 zealots depending on map and scouted Zergling counts etc' but I cant even confidently be that vague. Its a big issue. Sometimes Protoss does take an early 3rd base but by the time the production kicks in, Zerg snipes it and snowballs from there. The only tips I have are dedicate your zealot and ht to securing the 3rd base, dont try to make cannons and third nexus without a proper squad of zealots and 3 or 4 ht to support otherwise it can very easily get forced to cancel and the delay snowballs. Also, once you have a 3rd nexus, you have to keep 2 ht there at all times going up to 3 and a few zealots later as well. Thats a tip I strongly recommend. -Lurker, if you scout that Zerg has made lurkers first (before speed hydra or muta) then the variation is nice and simple. Make your robo now. It should be after 4 gates, rather than the usual after 6 gates. Also, immediately make 2 cannons at the 3rd base location before you make the nexus and send zealots there, positioned ahead of the cannons to intercept a possible lurker attack on the planned 3rd nexus location. Expect this attack as well. Make a 3rd cannon further back before nexus too. The priority is getting one cannon to finish so that you have detection, thats all that matters. However, many times lurker first is used purely defensively, with Zerg making 4 lurkers at his nat and 4 at his 3rd. Your zealot poke should identify this, and you sometimes have an opportunity to do damage before the lurkers have set up. Generally I recommend not commiting to attacks. Its a pretty tight window most of the time, so hanging back is fine. Protoss can assume that a hive and crackling style is being prepared, but speed hydras or mutas can come out next instead. Therefore, its similar to the advice where I said go to 6 gates regardless of what Zerg does. In this case Im saying continue to mass. This means make 18 goons and 2 forges. Dont rush getting 3 forges, a 4th nexus and only 10 goons. Again, some pros do this and sometimes it works very nicely, but is no way to reliably scout Zerg tech switches such that you can reactively compensate to such a degree. The variations that Protoss can get away with are things like pausing a round of production momentarily, small things like that rather than make 4th nexus while only on 12 goons. This may be surprising but I actually think the best way to approach PvZ as Protoss is not to be particularly flexible, and instead be quite rigid, making what I call the Hammer which is 18-24 dragoon back bone army at a predictable specific time. This may sound really boring and complete opposite of what a strategy game should be, I just genuinely think its the most reliable way to win consistently. The game plan is the smash every attempt Zerg makes to take a 5th and 6th base, while getting 4 bases and 10 gates. Thats the basic end game scenario. Things are going well if these goals are accomplished. If Zerg takes a 5th and 6th base successfully you are even. Mix in reavers, take a 5th base and get an archon backbone of 12 archons. Ofcourse easier said than done but what I mean is that many players push late game attacks too far and their archon count is always kept in check as a result. But anyway, you basically want to learn PvZ but the only way to really learn is to watch lots of games. Out of the current players Effort, Zero, Bisu, Free, Snow, Tyson, Shuttle are a good start. Its also really helpful to have an example game that is the baseline for the most solid standard strategy. For that I choose this game, I strongly recommend it, its brilliant: + Show Spoiler +Sonic's 11th SBENU OnGameNet Starleague Round of 24 Group A May 24 2015 + Show Spoiler +To demonstrate how the same build can win quickly check this one out: + Show Spoiler +Note I just sat down and wrote this in one sitting and it ended up longer than I initially intended, I haven’t proof read it or anything.
Thank you very much, that was informative! I appreciate that.
|
On June 05 2015 05:27 JieXian wrote:Very interesting thread, trolls and useless posts aside. I've also got a question. According to convention we should stop producing scourges to combat sairs once they've built more than but lately I've been seeing zergs dumping all their gas into scourges, making up to 10 to 20 or so, to combat sairs instead of making hydras so that they'd at least have a ground army. I've seen games where massing scourges failed completely or balanced out normally, while I've also seen games where massing hydras is enough to defend against sairs. Can someone please explain? Show nested quote +On June 05 2015 00:33 thezanursic wrote:On June 04 2015 20:30 B-royal wrote:
If 3 hatch spire into 5 hatch hydra is pretty much outdated, what are some of the newer strategies that zergs use? It's not outdated. BW doesn't work that way, and even if it has fallen out of favor in the top levels of FISH play, nothing has changed balance wise since zergs were taking OSLs and MSLs with that build. If you learn to execute this build properly you will improve, not by switching up to something more popular. I've been away from BW for some time so I have no idea what's popular right now, but your goal should be to learn to execute and understand a well optimized build, not to switch to whatever is popular. No offense to the people posting in this thread, but all of them are for all intents and purposes scrubs, like myself, they are C+ at best. You should NEVER assume whatever a player is doing (in game) or is saying on a forum (teamliquid) to be correct, even progamers, the only exceptions are Flash, Bisu and Jaedong (and a half a dozen of others), you'll learn a 100 tines more by watching their 4-6 year old VODs than listening to Ninazerg, no offense to Nina as she's probably a better player than myself, but in the grand scheme of things she still sucks. TLDR; Take everything you read here with a mountain of salt, watching top player FPVODs of Afreeca, or old VODs of Flash, Bisu and Jaedong, would probably be better for you. Edit: Technics is poating in this thread, a lot better than C+, but my point still stands, you shouldn't be basing your learning on what you hear on an internet forum, it's a good way to eventually hit a brick wall and stagnate. You're not helping at all. Your advice is bad and irrelevant and you obviously didn't read properly. OP said he doesn't understand games when he watches them. Nor do many of us. B-royal also asked a very simple question out of curiosity. Builds are popular for a reason. And you're wrong. Even a D+ can help a D to improve. They've beat everyone else at D for a reason. Without internet forums and day9 i'd still be a clueless E player. Sure... Bad and irelevant...
I didn't adress the rest of his post because if you don't approach the game properly you'll always end up on a forum, like TL asking for advice on how to beat X or Y or Z instead of approaching the problem differently and solving it yourself.
Anyway I was about to write an essay on why, OPs approach to learning was wrong, but it's pointless, really. Whatever I write you'll dismiss immediately, and the OP will rather take the advice from fellow posters in this thread instead of approaching the problem himself.
I also find it curious you cite Day9 as he advocates learning, analyzing the game yourself and finding your own answers instead of second hand learning on forums.
|
On June 06 2015 20:45 thezanursic wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2015 05:27 JieXian wrote:Very interesting thread, trolls and useless posts aside. I've also got a question. According to convention we should stop producing scourges to combat sairs once they've built more than but lately I've been seeing zergs dumping all their gas into scourges, making up to 10 to 20 or so, to combat sairs instead of making hydras so that they'd at least have a ground army. I've seen games where massing scourges failed completely or balanced out normally, while I've also seen games where massing hydras is enough to defend against sairs. Can someone please explain? On June 05 2015 00:33 thezanursic wrote:On June 04 2015 20:30 B-royal wrote:
If 3 hatch spire into 5 hatch hydra is pretty much outdated, what are some of the newer strategies that zergs use? It's not outdated. BW doesn't work that way, and even if it has fallen out of favor in the top levels of FISH play, nothing has changed balance wise since zergs were taking OSLs and MSLs with that build. If you learn to execute this build properly you will improve, not by switching up to something more popular. I've been away from BW for some time so I have no idea what's popular right now, but your goal should be to learn to execute and understand a well optimized build, not to switch to whatever is popular. No offense to the people posting in this thread, but all of them are for all intents and purposes scrubs, like myself, they are C+ at best. You should NEVER assume whatever a player is doing (in game) or is saying on a forum (teamliquid) to be correct, even progamers, the only exceptions are Flash, Bisu and Jaedong (and a half a dozen of others), you'll learn a 100 tines more by watching their 4-6 year old VODs than listening to Ninazerg, no offense to Nina as she's probably a better player than myself, but in the grand scheme of things she still sucks. TLDR; Take everything you read here with a mountain of salt, watching top player FPVODs of Afreeca, or old VODs of Flash, Bisu and Jaedong, would probably be better for you. Edit: Technics is poating in this thread, a lot better than C+, but my point still stands, you shouldn't be basing your learning on what you hear on an internet forum, it's a good way to eventually hit a brick wall and stagnate. You're not helping at all. Your advice is bad and irrelevant and you obviously didn't read properly. OP said he doesn't understand games when he watches them. Nor do many of us. B-royal also asked a very simple question out of curiosity. Builds are popular for a reason. And you're wrong. Even a D+ can help a D to improve. They've beat everyone else at D for a reason. Without internet forums and day9 i'd still be a clueless E player. Sure... Bad and irelevant... I didn't adress the rest of his post because if you don't approach the game properly you'll always end up on a forum, like TL asking for advice on how to beat X or Y or Z instead of approaching the problem differently and solving it yourself. Anyway I was about to write an essay on why, OPs approach to learning was wrong, but it's pointless, really. Whatever I write you'll dismiss immediately, and the OP will rather take the advice from fellow posters in this thread instead of approaching the problem himself. I also find it curious you cite Day9 as he advocates learning, analyzing the game yourself and finding your own answers instead of second hand learning on forums.
fine I won't need to address all of your post either but the main thing: He's a terran player looking to understand the game better when he's watching it. He's not going to play 100s of ZvP games and try out all the iterations to find out for himself when he can simply just ask.
|
On June 02 2015 17:34 vOdToasT wrote:Show nested quote +On June 02 2015 08:16 Sero wrote:
Against 2 gate, FD won't deal damage to protoss, but it can create space with mines to defend terran's earlier expansion, putting terran ahead. Also, FD is somewhat safe against DT openings thanks to the early mines, and the push allows terran to scout for nexus timing and prepare for other aggressive 1 base protoss builds. Terran players should go fake double to gain map control and safely expand, not to deal damage (at least against equally skilled opponents who they can't out-micro.) The strength of FD vs normal Protoss openings is indeed the mines, like you said. But you should also consider that if a 12 nexus is scouted, an FD opening lets the Terran reactively bunker rush. never really felt like you can do much with the mines vs a decent player besides deny them the map till obs are up
you can pretty much outright kill weaker players with an fd though, its pretty great
|
|
|
|