[D] Why does zerg never downtech? - Page 2
Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
HowardRoark
1146 Posts
| ||
Ridiculasaur
Canada8 Posts
Basically people just don't try hard enough imo, you play the strategy until it works for example, the pro game played by Real on a recent tournament he went 2base immortal mothership, if he refined the build more he could've won for sure. This was verse Stephano who seemed to have the ULTIMATE PvZ. | ||
Genome852
United States979 Posts
On February 29 2012 18:09 Ridiculasaur wrote: I think people tend to stick with what works, and don't transition into something that "could" work. For example way back when every zerg only went ling muta, no one really tried going broodlord infestor just cause people don't think outside the box. At the pro level people would stay on lair tech for the entire game 35+min, you look at the pros now, hive at 20min. I even remember talking on the public chat channels when they were always full like zerg and terran strategy saying "Why don't zergs go to hive tech quicker?" and someone replied "Cause it's too much gas"..... really? No, because infestors used to do half as much DPS as they do now... | ||
BEARDiaguz
Australia2362 Posts
On February 29 2012 17:52 synapse wrote: 3/3 almost always comes earlier for T because of hive timing. Lings are also purely fodder once tanks are out unless you plan on going Stephano style fast 2/2... That depends massively on build orders. Some T build orders focus hard on getting fast 2/2 (and presumably fast 3/3 right after), as do some Zerg builds. The aforementioned fast 2/2 ling with a 12 minute hive for 3/3 tends to get upgrades out faster then most Terran builds. | ||
crocodile
United States615 Posts
On February 25 2012 03:55 TG Manny wrote: I'm just a curious gold-league terran who spends too much time watching streams of pros and major tournaments and I want to ask a question I cannot seem to figure out after two weeks of pondering... Why doesn't zerg downtech? I mean, in late-game macro situations the zerg has lots of larva, lots of money, and lots of bases to tech switch but almost every zerg I see at all levels sticks to the highest tech they have access to (BL/infestor, roach-hydra, etc). Almost all of those zergs will end up complaining that they cannot "Break" certain unit compositions (including terran ghost+tank pre-patch). In the specific case of the Terran MMMTGV late-game unit composition, zerg should know they can remax much faster if they do damage to Terran tech units (tanks, ghosts less so, vikings) and can continually work down the terran army with wave-after-wave of ling/bling or switch some gas into mutalisks to harass reinforcement lines or worker lines, etc. Upon watching a game of ASUS ROG (Strelok v Bly G2), Bly goes Infestor Ultra (with a bait of infestor broodlord) with well upgraded lings. Strelok is going MMM+T with some vikings from the baited greater spire tech, but is able to continually wear down his opponent. He loses several major engages with good fungals and gets a much later 4th than he wants. Instead of continuing an assault with ling/bling (low build time and fairly cheap compared to other remaxes) he decides to try and make BLs even though there are some vikings on the field. Mutas or ling bane could have done wonders vs this Terran... So I'd like to hear the issues with downteching your army composition temporarily while, say, expanding, banking gas to use for the next big round of tech units, or w/e. I am confused that you acknowledge you are in gold league, but then criticize pros who play a different race from you, who could actually beat you with one hand. | ||
RaiD.RaynoR
United States294 Posts
| ||
BeeNu
615 Posts
| ||
ixi.genocide
United States981 Posts
On February 25 2012 04:14 TG Manny wrote: I already see a trend of "cost effectiveness" of the push but I guess I'm not describing it well. Think of it as a way to get a little more map control. let's say you have some infestors, some BL, and some corruptor with lingbane leftover from early game or to fend off a terran push. Why not whittle down tank counts and keep them low via lots of small engagements to force a terran retreat into a more defensible location? If broodlords lead the siege, marines run forward..fungal/bane them then the tanks are fairly exposed for about a minute before 2 rounds of marines clear and get back in position. This is where I'd say to downtech, but most zergs will take the chance to strengthen their festor/BL numbers instead and expand. Both good ideas, I'm not denying, but as a Terran if you kill a healthy portion of my tanks (>50%) I feel naked and easily abused by wave after wave of ling/bane. If the first engage exposes the tanks, even with no tank kills, then zerg needs to capitalize on the ability to get into the tank lines without much added added marine DPS or catch retreating tanks. I suppose I'm just too critical of masters/Pro who do so much more mechanically and harassment wise to always know the best way to abuse the opponent and too low of level to see it in my own matches often. One of the main reasons why you wouldn't see a zerg player downtech to ling/bane is because tanks can turn a push that was supposed to punish you into an all-in that went horribly wrong. This is especially disheartenining when you are way ahead and the 30 marines that pops up afterwards rapes all of the brolords. the other is that a baneling takes 44 seconds to make and you have to make them relatively close to the terran base. so in reality it takes about 50 seconds to have a baneling follow up. The safer way to play is to build up an even more powerful brolord/infester army and take another base. | ||
TheDougler
Canada8287 Posts
On February 25 2012 04:01 Drmooose wrote: I wouldn't say Zergs don't downtech ever. In ZvP for example remaxing on Roaches is quite common. One of the biggest problems in ZvT is 3/3 marines are very good vs lings. Infestor/BL is much more cost effective overall. At late stages of the game players are often starved for resources as well. Agreed, and Blings are good but can also lose you the game if you are not cost effective with them. I too have enjoyed late game muta switches. | ||
darkscream
Canada2310 Posts
| ||
Tobberoth
Sweden6375 Posts
| ||
Zarent
109 Posts
It seems as though downteching would work if you can guarantee that you'll deal a good amount of damage with it, but honestly, efficiency is the key in the late game, and massing tier 1s/2s doesn't necessarily connote that. | ||
barrykp
Ireland174 Posts
| ||
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
ZvP: Endgame remaxing Ultra/ling on roaches, Broodlord/Infestor on Ling/Roach, Hydra remaxing on something that can quickly move across the map and win it (Hydra timing attack destroys Protoss 2base air walloff, for instance). ZvT: Frequent tech switches, but army more often builds on itself. Ling/Bling/Muta or Ling/Infestor/X but they keep using speedlings throughout the entire matchup. Don't knock when a t1/1.5 tech stays put as a mainstay instead of some exquisite swap. Any big trade that REALLY goes Z's way, they're remaxing on quick speedlings + whatever else the situation calls for. | ||
Noocta
France12574 Posts
But it can sometimes be effective. There's a middle ground between only remaking T3 and Infestor battle after battle, or stop building them completely. One thing here tho, is the lack of baneling usage in the lategame, when the tank number is low. Zerg could work on that imo. There's nothing more frightening than lots of baneling when you don't have any tanks. | ||
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On March 01 2012 02:48 crocodile wrote: I am confused that you acknowledge you are in gold league, but then criticize pros who play a different race from you, who could actually beat you with one hand. i'm confused why you have to criticize him for asking a perfectly valid question. nice ad hominem there. there's nothing wrong with asking a question about the game for the sake of finding out the answer and improving your knowledge. anyways, larva can be thought of as a "third resource" (or fourth if you count supply) for zerg. using it ALL to remax on a low tier in a lategame is kind of analogous to an all-in because you're kind of screwed if you lose that army and have no larvae. course, i won't deny that making a bunch of cracklings to harass late game can be pretty good if you use them right. 13.6 dps is nothing to sneeze at. | ||
Dison92
Denmark142 Posts
Therefore you go T3/inf/x to crush his army. Where the x is determined by what the T goes, I would usually go roaches versus mech, and against Marine/Tank, I would make a few lings/banes, so if his marines run forward, u FG them, and run banes into them. | ||
Let it Raine
Canada1245 Posts
you use those units to try and get the terran player to mess up so you can either get a lead heading into the late game or to out right kill him if his mess up was big enough. so the reason why you dont downtech, 9 times out of 10, is because there isn't much point in going from a max ling infestor ultra army into muta ling bling army when you're fighting versus a terran with 3-3 marines and an even supply count. | ||
aebriol
Norway2066 Posts
On February 25 2012 03:55 TG Manny wrote: So I'd like to hear the issues with downteching your army composition temporarily while, say, expanding, banking gas to use for the next big round of tech units, or w/e. You are wrong. It's quite normal to remax on ling roach bane. Thing is, you can't beat a terran with multiple medivacs without actually killing the medivacs. You can't beat a protoss with multiple colossus archon with low tech units. Soooo .... | ||
ePdeLay
Australia220 Posts
| ||
| ||