Koreans React to GSL Ro8 - Page 28
Forum Index > SC2 General |
vnlegend
United States1389 Posts
| ||
us.insurgency
United States330 Posts
| ||
Rflcrx
503 Posts
| ||
Pudge_172
United States1378 Posts
I do have 2 awful Bronze level questions though. 1. Would it be viable to hatch first in the Main against 2-Rax? 2. If you go hatch first in the Main and they've only faked 2-Rax all-in, how far behind does that put you? | ||
pirates
United States701 Posts
On December 07 2010 09:14 DooMDash wrote: As a Terran I can tell you that the match up is screwed up after mid-game in Zergs favor. Needs to be adjusted and the all-ins will go away. It has something to do with sling/bane/muta as a combo. I think T needs a more mobile way to deal with muta. (2000 diamond for reference.) This is kinda true. Massing missile turrets is so brood war. Vikings, Terran's air-to-air unit gets shit on by mutaslisks in groups :/. Upgraded marines shit on Mutas but any decent Zerg can harass with mutas and have a group of marines running in circles without losing his muta ball. Thors own mutas but they are also one of the slowest combat units. | ||
QuixoticO
Netherlands810 Posts
Besides the games being boring I find it hilarious TSL_Rain is apologizing for winning. Considering the amount of money they're playing for it doesn't surprise me at all they'll do anything to win if it's legal. | ||
pirates
United States701 Posts
On December 07 2010 09:18 Pudge_172 wrote: I'm an awful Bronze player, but I've been taking Idra and Ret's side on hatch first the whole time. I surely don't know anything about the game better than they do except how to lose a lot. I do have 2 awful Bronze level questions though. 1. Would it be viable to hatch first in the Main against 2-Rax? 2. If you go hatch first in the Main and they've only faked 2-Rax all-in, how far behind does that put you? Depends on the map and where you put it. The main reason you want to hatch at your Natural is you get more creep and the terran is shooting something that is NOT YOUR DRONES AT YOUR MAIN. You want your 2nd Hatch to be a distance away. The marines take a while to kill your hatch and this buys you time for Lings to hatch and drones to mine. If they were attacking your main hatchery they would just kill all your workers first and you would lose instantly. And if you Hatch first in the main and DONT get attacked.. um.. it depends on WHEN they decide to attack and what you build to stop it or what build you are going for. Unless its like a 5-6 minute mark attack an in-base hatch really doesn't set you back at all assuming you have SOME drones mining at your natural and a hatchery there. | ||
hmunkey
United Kingdom1973 Posts
On December 07 2010 08:36 Chill wrote:I said "Some WWE sytem" implying the show is more important than the competition. I didn't imply it was the WWE. If you want to infer that, go ahead, but it's not my intention. It is in a way and it's true for every spectator sport. If the show wasn't as important to the competition, it wouldn't gain widespread appeal and thus wouldn't be a big deal. Games like football and basketball are big because they're fun to watch, making the show equal with the competition. Conversely, chess isn't and therefore has almost no mass appeal as a competition.Sports, games, etc. are all forms of entertainment and only flourish as such, and while it's always great to find out who's the best, it's done in the name of the show. Without viewers, competitive/professional Starcraft is basically nothing. | ||
JoeSchmoe
Canada2058 Posts
On December 07 2010 08:56 bokeevboke wrote: Look how people recommend GSL games to watch... most of games are recommended NOT to watch by over 70%. Which is quite alarming and apparently SC2 is failing at viewership. Why you trying to fight facts so hard? We are the SC community and if we don't say what we feel how do you see Blizzard improving situation. When I skim through threads I see most people here disappointed and complaining. If you see some amazing interesting stuff in these games you are lucky to be in these 20% who likes current scene but it doesn't help overall. Please do not bring up the "recommended game" polls as support for your argument. They are about as ridiculous as the amount of whining in this thread. Basically all games that Jinro wins are recommended while all games he lost are boring shit. Even that game where the opponent mass roach against tanks + marauders had like a 80% recommendation rate. | ||
TheButtonmen
Canada1401 Posts
14 hatch vs not 14 hatch builds: You need to 14 hatch if you want to stand a chance because of the creep spread; any build where you don't get the creep spreed from the 14 hatch at the natural it's impossible to stop them from containing you with bunkers, secondly due to the fact that marines have no attack delay unlike zerglings you need to fight them on creep when using slow zerglings to stop the shoot n scoot from making your lings completely cost ineffective, you also need the creep spread to build forward spines so that you can survive a all in. Rain's play: He's a progamer he's payed to win not put on a show. Balance issues: No numerical nerfs / buffs are needed (though the -5 seconds for bunkers on the PTR makes me leery) instead either add an attack delay to the marines or remove the attack delay from zerglings would go a long way towards solving this issue. Is 14 Hatch economic cheese: No as I previously mentioned 14 hatch is the safest zerg build possible. | ||
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On December 07 2010 09:29 TheButtonmen wrote: 2k Diamond Zerg here figured I'd toss in my 2 cents. 14 hatch vs not 14 hatch builds: You need to 14 hatch if you want to stand a chance because of the creep spread; any build where you don't get the creep spreed from the 14 hatch at the natural it's impossible to stop them from containing you with bunkers, secondly due to the fact that marines have no attack delay unlike zerglings you need to fight them on creep when using slow zerglings to stop the shoot n scoot from making your lings completely cost ineffective, you also need the creep spread to build forward spines so that you can survive a all in. Rain's play: He's a progamer he's payed to win not put on a show. Balance issues: No numerical nerfs / buffs are needed (though the -5 seconds for bunkers on the PTR makes me leery) instead either add an attack delay to the marines or remove the attack delay from zerglings would go a long way towards solving this issue. Is 14 Hatch economic cheese: No as I previously mentioned 14 hatch is the safest zerg build possible. Why even 14 hatch? Why not 12 or 13 hatch if 2rax is so prevalent? Considering you're still on 2base I feel as though even though there's a noticeable economic "hit" per se, there's also you better countering pressure, etc. | ||
dabom88
United States3483 Posts
On December 07 2010 08:46 Angelbelow wrote: The counter argument is that there are plenty of games where the zerg 14 hatches and still manages to hold. Its not just verbal reasoning. FD and Nestea went hatch first literally everygame against terran so far and those 2 are the champions. The Foxer games vs Leenock this season went into macro games, leenock was able to hold his 2 rack pressure after going hatch first. I agree, its easy to think hatch first is inferior, I too thought this until Ret explained it. As a zerg player that makes a lot of sense and its not easy for me to see why its ideal, not only to stop early pressure but to put you in an ideal situation as the game progresses. No doubt that Im being partially subjective/biased. But I dont think im saying anything unreasonable. That isn't really a counter-argument though. The argument isn't really "should Zergs EVER 14 Hatch" or "is 14 Hatch auto-lose or not vs. 2-Rax". The argument is "SHOULD Zergs go 14 Hatch vs. 2-Rax". People that say "no" say Zergs lose too often against 2-Rax with 14 Hatch, and point to the various games that support this argument. They feel Zergs could try other builds than continue doing a strategy that consistently makes them lose. People that say "yes" say it's the BEST response to 2-Rax and point to verbal reasoning and Idra/Ret testimony. People in this group feel that 2-Rax is so strong that they HAVE to go 14 Hatch, what they feel is "The best response to 2-Rax" just to keep up with it. Pointing to games where Zergs win against 2-Rax just supports an argument that Zergs shouldn't complain about 2-Rax because it's possible to win against it. Those games would belong in a "Can 14 Hatch beat 2-Rax" argument. The argument in this topic already assumes that 14 Hatch can win against it, but it s still really hard to pull off. The anti-14 Hatchers say "Zergs should stop 14 Hatching against 2-Rax because they lose too much against it and should do something different" and the pro-14 Hatchers say "14 Hatch is the only viable response to 2-Rax because 2-Rax beats every other build. However, 2-Rax is still very hard to hold off with 14 Hatch", leading several in this group to believe this shows imbalance because the "best strat" against 2-Rax isn't completely consistent (though, of course, imbalance isn't the core of this argument). If the argument DIDN'T assume 2-Rax was really strong against 14 Hatch, then the pro-14 Hatchers wouldn't be complaining about how hard 2-Rax is to hold off, and the anti-14 Hatchers wouldn't exist. | ||
LiOn
Austria239 Posts
| ||
Imperfect1987
United States558 Posts
| ||
Adeeler
United Kingdom764 Posts
Spine Crawler - 2 larva, 150 minerals, 300 HP, 25dmg X 1.85s, dps 25x(1/1.85) = 13.51 Zerglings - 1 larva, 50 minerals, 70 hp, 10dmg X 0.696s, dps 10x(1/0.696) = 14.36 Blind baneling nest, multiple spines seems to be vital just to live for 5 mins so we got to give up the gains and get them. I think multiple Spines is the way, 2-3 at natural just to be safe and not droning much at all just relying on crawlers. Blistering Sands with 2 entrances and Steppes of War messes things up in many ways but thats life we have to be significantly weak for the 1st 10 mins and vulnerable to multiple timings. Blizzard doesn't change things early on and even in expansions I doubt any early game unit will ever be added. They could solve all these cheesey lame problems by causing structure(hatch+tumour only) spawned creep to dmg enemy workers by 4 dmg/s. A bonus dmg on zerglings vs scvs would have reprocussions for later game harass and attacking repairing stuff but they could make that dmg bonus only occur on creep also. But they've never shown interest in giving zerg more options directly ever for early game. They could always give the queen +25 extra energy when built which she could use to lay a tumour when she's built and so maybe spread the creep just outside of natural in time to build a crawler earliar or for her to have energy to do 1 transfusion instead of an inject. | ||
guitarizt
United States1492 Posts
I don't remember if he threw the spine down right away in the xel naga game, but it was within range of the bunker. Even so I though he should have pulled drones and lings when the spine got into the red and he would have been fine and probably would have won the game from that point on as it seems it would have been about even for two equally skilled players. I mean remember who won the first two gsls? =/ I think it's hilarious how people are putting so much stock into what happens in one gsl series like it's the new written in stone law of starcraft. On ladder the matchup might look fine. Emphasis on might though and I think a lot of the maps on ladder are horrible. ZvP PvP and PvT seems more broken to me than ZvT but the game is still very well balanced taking everything into consideration. | ||
MahatmaSC2
United States192 Posts
| ||
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
you guys are complaining about cheese in the ro8...you guys should complain to boxer, he started it | ||
Bellygareth
France512 Posts
As far as the terran late game being so awful, all the people (checking a few randomly, gold level, silver level mostly, and only a few diamond), need to back it up with evidence and not "lol late game terran don't work", because the "it doesn't work" argument, isn't one. Jinro showed a couple good late game oriented terran plays, and I personnaly seen some pretty convincing late game play from terrans such as Tarson, or Drewbie, against zergs. The exemples doesn't make an argument for the "it's balance" part I agree, but they are enough to warrant arguments from the " it's broken"part. So please stop just throwing the "terran late game sucks" sentence every other post as if it would become true just because you say it a lot. Furthermore, late game depending a lot on personnal skill, expension timing, harrass and so on, it's hard to blame it all on the race. Besides it makes the threads pretty horrible. On another level, can we just all agree that too powerfull all-ins must be toned down? Without even speaking of race or matchups, and regardless of potential late game advantages? | ||
ThE_ShiZ
United States143 Posts
No, there will be a huge economic difference because if you pool first, it's just giving the Terran a free ticket to bunker wall-in and then expand his entire heart out while you're struggling to break his wall-in. And if you hatch first he's going to wall in just as easily. It's not a free ticket. you can blocjk it with a few drones. I havebn';t gotten bunker blocked since 1.0 | ||
| ||