|
On December 07 2010 04:53 MementoMori wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2010 03:12 50bani wrote: I stand by my opinion: TSLrain played it correctly if he was playing to win. You have to play tvz like that, macro games get you nowhere as Terran Yeah well that was the OP's point though I assume. I think that the game is in a bit of unfortunate state at the moment in TvZ. But just because it seems this way now doesn't mean it will continue to be even without balance changes. But changes in the patch on the test realm may help improve terran mid-late game without the ability to fungal dropships and especially vikings.
Changing the late game won't change the early game. Even if terran now has a 50% chance of winning late game, they still have like a 75% winning in the early game and 75% > 50%.
|
I think there is a prisoner's dilemma problem here. Obviously Rain should try to make money. However, cheese more frequent than occasionally is not fun to watch. Therefore, if all players act to make more money, resulting in lots of cheese, their greed will destroy the tournaments and their own source of income. It's the same problem in pollution, makes sense for any individual but not when everyone is doing it.
|
On December 07 2010 05:01 I_Love_Bacon wrote: The number of people who keep thinking zergs going 14-hatch are being "greedy" is fucking absurd. They are not opening 3 hatch before pool, they're opening hatch first because if they don't it leads to one of the following:
A: Zerg 1 base play is scouted by 1 scv or 1 scan and easily countered. B: A slightly delayed push with more marines/scvs. B: Terran contain at the ramp. C: Terran Expansion that gives him a huge econ advantage.
The only way opening a slower hatch is effective is if your opponent is an idiot and pushes too soon, despite it being obvious you're on one base.
Just want to point out that going one base is different versus opening pool first and transitioning into hatchery at ~20. Its not an auto lose if you do this, seriously.
|
On December 07 2010 05:04 darmousseh wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2010 04:53 MementoMori wrote:On December 07 2010 03:12 50bani wrote: I stand by my opinion: TSLrain played it correctly if he was playing to win. You have to play tvz like that, macro games get you nowhere as Terran Yeah well that was the OP's point though I assume. I think that the game is in a bit of unfortunate state at the moment in TvZ. But just because it seems this way now doesn't mean it will continue to be even without balance changes. But changes in the patch on the test realm may help improve terran mid-late game without the ability to fungal dropships and especially vikings. Changing the late game won't change the early game. Even if terran now has a 50% chance of winning late game, they still have like a 75% winning in the early game and 75% > 50%.
yes it will. if zerg late game isn't as dominant, they wouldn't risk 14 hatch EVERY game to get the early economic advantage, and will try more early all-in builds.
and if late-game is changed enough to be in T favor in TvZ, Terran might try to fast expand instead, or come up with some mass OC cheese.
|
On December 07 2010 04:56 dasanivan wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2010 04:53 Xde wrote:On December 07 2010 03:12 50bani wrote: I stand by my opinion: TSLrain played it correctly if he was playing to win. You have to play tvz like that, macro games get you nowhere as Terran This is the problem. Every race should feel like they stand an equal chance against other races in a heavy macro game. Whether or not this is the case, I don't know as I only play Zerg. It would appear though that Terrans feel like they can't win in a late game macro battle against Zerg. If terrans really are unable to compete with Zergs in a macro game I think Blizzard should adjust some things to fix this. i'm actually beginning to think that terran macro isn't the problem so much as the fact that there's no incentive to practice it. even if terran macro were strong enough so that the chance of winning in lategame was always 60%, players would practice early game strategies that would increase the chance of winning to 61%.
I strongly agree with this.. It just feels that no matter what change comes in patch or how the game evolves, Terran is always trying to go for cheesy/all-in strategies that will end the game before any mid/late game..
I think there are several reasons for that..
1) Terran can unlock their tech extremly fast and this leads to variety of all-in strategies during say first 10 minutes.
2) Protoss and Zerg "feels" stronger late game due to replenishing army faster with both warp-in technology and larvae stacking.
3) Zerg being able to tech switch at will between Broodlord/Corruptor and Ultralisk/Zerglings is so scary for Terran, that its just safer to end the game before its actually happening.
There are probably more.. Im not saying those points are balance related, but this is (at least in my mind) what leads to this issue.
|
If you want to blame anyone, blame Nestea for hatching first and allowing himself to get beat by the same thing 3 times.
Grats to Rain for taking advantage of a greedy Nestea and exposing his weaknesses to advance to the RO4.
|
14 hatch isn't "greedy", it's not "gaining an advantage", it's necessary to stay even with the Terrans economy due to how powerful the MULE is on a saturated mineral line.
If you want to call 14 hatch "greedy" you need to admit that 15 OC is just as greedy.
suggestions on how to punish greedy 15 OCing Terrans would be much appreciated.
|
I don't understand people being upset more than the Pro-Players themselves. The way people argue their points in defense of each Pro Player or race is crazy. If this thread was a discussion in a bar in person I would fear a fight breaking out the way people attack each other about a point that no one will come to an agreement on.
Look at all the tournaments of past and all of the cheese and so on. Fans act like the Players hate each other so they feel they must come to their players rescue. When after the match they are doing things like partying in a hotel room on stream. Appearing on SoTG together taking photo's together or are roommates at the next tournament. Pro players maybe upset about the game but not necessarily upset at the player to the point they hate them. Im sure Rain and Nestea are still friends and are still practice partners.
That said its apart of the game Rain did what he must and it worked. Thats it's not like the honor code of progaming includes no cheese. its really not that big of a deal. As chill said do what you must to win money is on the line.
|
On December 07 2010 04:50 Sm3agol wrote: bunch of shit.
you cleary don't have the capacity to extrapolate scenarios and how they coorelate. If the zerg 'prepares' against this all-in as you say by getting spinecrawlers and spending a lot of larva on zerglings, he loses anyway. The terran just simply DOESN'T allin and now he has a HUGE economic lead which results with a heavy timing attack the zerg cannot defend. The only way for zerg to win is to walk an incredibly fine line of greed. He should hatch and build just enough to defend while still having an economy. going to hard economy = lose, going to hard defense = lose. This in and of itself is the crux of the zerg, when to drone, when to make units. However, this 2rax marine allin shit takes it to a whole new level.
|
While I do think the sort of play Rain used can be countered by an 11-pool build, that sort of play is pretty sad to see. My sense is that most of the problems terrans experience in the late game results from inexperience in the late game. My suggestion is that terrans try to develop a macro style, even if it means a few ladder losses.
|
On December 07 2010 05:05 Chaosvuistje wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2010 05:01 I_Love_Bacon wrote: The number of people who keep thinking zergs going 14-hatch are being "greedy" is fucking absurd. They are not opening 3 hatch before pool, they're opening hatch first because if they don't it leads to one of the following:
A: Zerg 1 base play is scouted by 1 scv or 1 scan and easily countered. B: A slightly delayed push with more marines/scvs. B: Terran contain at the ramp. C: Terran Expansion that gives him a huge econ advantage.
The only way opening a slower hatch is effective is if your opponent is an idiot and pushes too soon, despite it being obvious you're on one base. Just want to point out that going one base is different versus opening pool first and transitioning into hatchery at ~20. Its not an auto lose if you do this, seriously.
You're right, it's not an auto loss. However, it puts you at a huge disadvantage. You're saying it's ok because you're no longer losing outright... That isn't a good sign.
|
On December 07 2010 04:53 Chaosvuistje wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2010 04:30 UFO wrote:On December 07 2010 03:12 Welmu wrote: I wouldn't blame Blizzard on this. I think it's Nestea's problem not being prepared for all-in. Seriously, Marine/SCV all in isn't impossible to beat... Actually it is quite impossible to beat since u have to go 14 hatch and 14 hatch is an auto-lose vs scv/marine all in as we saw on steppes of war. well see here's the thing. You don't HAVE to go hatch first. I repeat, you do not HAVE to hatch first. Hatch first is a build designed to give an edge over the opponent right away. If he leaves you alone he is behind, period. Pool first into Hatchery is a lot safer but doesn't give you that edge straight away. I would also like to state the record that most zergs nowadays don't scout with a drone if they go hatch first or plan to. If you send in an overlord in one direction and a drone at 9 in the other, you will scout both the bases in roughly the same time, leaving only the far away cross-position base unscouted. This gives you a 66% chance of scouting what he is doing for only a couple of minerals lost. I am absolutely baffled when I watch progamers not scouting with a drone when they go hatchery first. Its like the riskiest opening you can open up with but they still believe that the 100 mineral over 2 minutes gained by keeping the drone mining is better than scouting that proxy barracks/forge first sooner which will completely destroy hatch first builds. I can't fanthom why zergs nowadays think you have to hatch first. Infact, since most of the terrans go for aggressive economy punishing builds, its an advantage if you go pool first since you can hold off the aggression more easily. For the record, I'm around 1800 diamond zerg ( not like it matters ) who goes pool first vs terran and dronescout on 9, and I still win a lot of my games. Cause you simply can't hold an 2rax push with larve from 1base. Hell, the terran doesn't even need to kill you when you dont 14 hatch, he can just bunker down your ramp and do whatever he wants since he got a economy advantage. 14hatch is the only way you got enough units to be able to defend so yes, you HAVE to 14 hatch to have a chance.
|
On December 07 2010 05:07 Irrelevant wrote: If you want to blame anyone, blame Nestea for hatching first and allowing himself to get beat by the same thing 3 times.
Grats to Rain for taking advantage of a greedy Nestea and exposing his weaknesses to advance to the RO4. i really wish people would stop saying this hatch first isnt greedy. its actually equally economical as 14 pool 16 hatch the difference being you get earlier larva and puts you in a position to more efficiently deal with early pressure/harass
14 hatch is actually safer, not economical....
|
I HATE watching repeated, boring, 'unfair' short games from TvZ - but if its the terran's best shot at winning, how can you not expect them to use that card?
Clearly the feel they cant compete past midgame with zerg, especially not with an econ beast zerg.
This is why I dont understand the bunker change, it just promotes this metagame :<
|
On December 07 2010 05:10 pwadoc wrote: While I do think the sort of play Rain used can be countered by an 11-pool build, that sort of play is pretty sad to see. My sense is that most of the problems terrans experience in the late game results from inexperience in the late game. My suggestion is that terrans try to develop a macro style, even if it means a few ladder losses.
But then you run into the problem with there being little incentive to do so when Zergs keep 14-Hatching and 2-Rax beating 14-Hatch so often.
|
On December 07 2010 04:52 billyX333 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2010 04:50 Sm3agol wrote: What i fail to understand is why zerg consistently fail to prepare for all-ins like this when they KNOW it's coming. They go 14 hatch and........start droning up preparing for the late game half the time? Seriously? I see this in streams and replays ALL the time. 14 hatch against T should go like this. Drone up, get hatch. Have second queen for second hatch ready to go. Spam your produce zergling key for every single larvae you have for the next minute. You know its farking coming, so act like you have map hacks. Its not like Ts can see exactly what you are doing. Now obviously I'm not top diamond, so I can't say I know the exact timings on all this, but it can't be that off. I see streams ALL the time of people losing to this crap with their nat almost saturated, they have gas almost up and everything. Not a spine crawler or mass zergling group in sight. QUIT DRONING UP YOU FARKING IDIOTS. If he marines scv all-ins you, and you have 25 zerglings, you win. If he doesn't, you're still up a base, just drone up from there, your zerglings don't evaporate if the push doesn't come. cut at 15 drones build 24 zerglings fail vs 2rax into cc Because so many Ts do that vs zerg now? Id say that easily >50% of Ts do that vs Z on ladder, and in things like GSL, probably more like 80%. He won't know you're massing zerglings unless he gets the perfect scan off, which would mean your zerglings aren't in the right place anyways. Seriously, a rine/scv push is a win or die build. And vs a 14 hatch drone up, its almost a direct counter. While a 14 hatch mass zerg is not even close to all in, and could do enough harass to probably prevent an easy T expo while you drone up. Lets see, 14 hatch, drone up vs a T you are almost certain is going to marine/SCV all-in you, and almost guarantee you will be hard-pressed to hold it all, or.... 14 hatch, zergling up, worst case he FEs, you can still put pressure on him with your zerglings, you have your FE up........and you're headed to a macro game that Zs can always win, everything being equal.
Lets see......why not drone up, Ts need quick easy wins. And its called an all-in for a reason. So beat it, and win? Why is there as issue with this? Is it not an all-in then? If he sends 8 marines and 6 scvs, and you rape it with 20 zerglings and 2 queens.....and he still is ahead? I'm confused.
|
On December 07 2010 05:11 billyX333 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2010 05:07 Irrelevant wrote: If you want to blame anyone, blame Nestea for hatching first and allowing himself to get beat by the same thing 3 times.
Grats to Rain for taking advantage of a greedy Nestea and exposing his weaknesses to advance to the RO4. i really wish people would stop saying this hatch first isnt greedy. its actually equally economical as 14 pool 16 hatch the difference being you get earlier larva and puts you in a position to more efficiently deal with early pressure/harass 14 hatch is actually safer, not economical....
the more i think about it though, in light of how powerful the pressure of 2 rax is, i wonder if nestea would still have had a better chance of winning without 14 hatching.
edited: out something that i couldnt make sense of
|
i really wish people would stop saying this hatch first is greedy. its actually less economical than 14 pool 16 hatch the difference being you get own early and puts you in a terrible position to less efficiently deal with early pressure/harass
14 hatch is actually riskier, and barely more economical....
|
On December 07 2010 05:12 resilve wrote: I HATE watching repeated, boring, 'unfair' short games from TvZ - but if its the terran's best shot at winning, how can you not expect them to use that card?
Clearly the feel they cant compete past midgame with zerg, especially not with an econ beast zerg.
This is why I dont understand the bunker change, it just promotes this metagame :<
This is the line of thinking that avilo just wants people to believe.
"Clearly the feel they cant compete past midgame".... is simply complaining without merit. Honestly, how many top quality players have you seen go late game TvZ to actually analyze the matchup?
This is the line of thinking I swear most terrans are using when they complain: Late game is hard. More decisions to make and lots of units to control. Early game is ridiculously easy. Therefore, late game favors zerg so I must end it early.
I'm not saying Z isn't favored in the late game. I honestly don't know. I don't think anybody does right now. It has a feeling that zerg might be favored, but given how few quality games and players we see past the 10 minute mark in a tvz, it's not even remotely a closed case.
|
Serves Nestea right, better player for sure, but 14 hatch?
With the trends especially showing in ro64, you'd think players would wise up by now, but people are stubborn I suppose.
In all seriousness,
Nestea : 14 hatch :: Marineking : marines
Punishment is given cause theres an opening for it, reminds me of when Yellow got bunker rushed 3x by SlayerS`BoxeR. Not once during the set did he bother to try to pool first. BoxeR himself wasn't happy after the win. He knew what he did, but he did it to win. That semi-final lasted only 30 minutes in a bo5 set, I'm surprised people act like this stuff hasn't happened before.
Rain doesn't need to apologize, cause he's in the semi's one step closer to the gold, but he feels guilty cause he feels like he disappointed fans of Starcraft, which in my opinion he really hasn't.
|
|
|
|