Support NeoGAF

[Pandaman]

You say that like it's not true? Roach/speedling beats zealot/stalker at equal priced armies

if only it was possible to match toss cost for cost.

lets reexamine what you just said:
150~/200 roach/speedling beats 100/200 zealot/stalker for cost'.
therefore, zealot/stalker is bad.

 

[ezrarh]

if only it was possible to match toss cost for cost.

Early game you can. We're not talking at max army because it's in no way realistic to have max army of ling/roach vs zealot/stalker.

 

[Ikuu]

Hmm, when terran double bunker the ramp against a 15 hatch zerg, what do they gain except a bit of a delay in the zerg play? Should the terran completely fill the bunkers up? What if the zerg goes banelings early and destroys both bunkers + all the marines?

How should the terran go from that point on (when the bunkers are gone)?

They've pretty much won the game at this point unless they mess up something awful, they force the Zerg to spend resources on destroying the bunkers. They can also destroy your hatchery at your expansion putting you further behind.

 

[Yoshichan]

whatever you want because you forced 1 base baneling and your ramp isnt even threatened by it.

Yeah but I've forced the zerg to produce banelings :/ I don't wanna do that because I can't handle baneling/zergling combo...

They've pretty much won the game at this point unless they mess up something awful, they force the Zerg to spend resources on destroying the bunkers. They can also destroy your hatchery at your expansion putting you further behind.

How? With the economic advantage, should terran just mass marines/marauders?

 

[Ikuu]

While the Zerg is making banelings the Terran can just expand, or mass units for a timing attack and just roll the Zerg. Zerg is always going to make Banelings in ZvT so you haven't forced anything.

 

[Pandaman]

Early game you can. We're not talking at max army because it's in no way realistic to have max army of ling/roach vs zealot/stalker.

no you cant.
zerg has to deal with foodlocks because we have to almost double your food to match you cost for cost.
food comes from larvae too as it happens.

 

[ezrarh]

no you cant.
zerg has to deal with foodlocks because we have to almost double your food to match you cost for cost.
food comes from larvae too as it happens.

But that's how you stop 4gate. I think you misunderstood me or I didn't word it properly. While you do have to have more supply, at equal mineral costs you can get 3 roaches for 225/75 + 25 for the extra two supply while for 2 stalkers it costs 250/100. I'm assuming you have two hatches for larvae.

 

[Yoshichan]

Me and a friend's trying out this double bunker thing... it's not going well at all. Please help our terran!

https://www.yousendit.com/download/bFlHcXlyTERwTVd4dnc9PQ

edit: just took one of the billion replays we've done today for double bunker trick. Hopefully it's a "valid" one.

 

[Spl1nter]

But that's how you stop 4gate. I think you misunderstood me or I didn't word it properly. While you do have to have more supply, at equal mineral costs you can get 3 roaches for 225/75 + 25 for the extra two supply while for 2 stalkers it costs 250/100. I'm assuming you have two hatches for larvae.

The reason zerg is able to hold off a 4 gate is because of more production capabilities than the protoss and static defense.

 

[Ikuu]

Me and a friend's trying out this double bunker thing... it's not going well at all. Please help our terran!

https://www.yousendit.com/download/bFlHcXlyTERwTVd4dnc9PQ

edit: just took one of the billion replays we've done today for double bunker trick. Hopefully it's a "valid" one.

His macro is awful, when you destroy the bunkers he has something like 1k minerals and you're ahead in supply.

 

[Pandaman]

But that's how you stop 4gate.

i wish. if it was even remotely possble to double a tosses food before a 4gate zergs would never lose to em.

I think you misunderstood me or I didn't word it properly. While you do have to have more supply, at equal mineral costs you can get 3 roaches for 225/75 + 25 for the extra two supply while for 2 stalkers it costs 250/100. I'm assuming you have two hatches for larvae.

overlords dont take vespene gas. unfortunately.

you build 2 stalkers, i build 3 roaches, nevermind that 2 stalkers can lol through 3 nonspeed roaches and nevermind that speed roachs require a muuuuuch heavier gas investment than core+warpgates and nevermind that stalkers warp in faster than queens inject.

we're still behind you on cost that way and with absolutely perfect larvae management [never more than 2 per hatch], we have a 2 larvae buffer to use going roach vs a 4 warp gate.

there's a reason we build spine crawlers and turtle next to them, your army will always be better in a 4warp if we're equally good. your econ may even be better, but 2 base vs 1 you'll see diminishing returns we wont and that's how zergs win.

stalkers and zealots are fine. better than fine, they're actually good. not marauders, but still damn good.

 

[ezrarh]

The reason zerg is able to hold off a 4 gate is because of more production capabilities than the protoss and static defense.

I'm talking about a situation without any sentries which means most of your zerglings can attack. Basically, what I'm trying to say is in a realistic scenario where you have 5 zealots/5 stalkers which is 1125 minerals/250 gas. You can get 9 roaches/18 ling for 1075/225. That's 20 supply vs 27. You can add another overlord for 100 and you're about equal in mineral cost. That absolutely beats the toss army. You typically get a static defense because of the extra range needed since not all your army can attack if toss gets the proper forcefields up but without ff to control the battlefield, zerg wins that battle easily. Which goes my initial point, if you remove or severely nerf ff, you can switch the balance in favor of zerg easily.

overlords dont take vespene gas. unfortunately.

you build 2 stalkers, i build 3 roaches, nevermind that 2 stalkers can lol through 3 nonspeed roaches and nevermind that speed roachs require a muuuuuch heavier gas investment than core+warpgates and nevermind that stalkers warp in faster than queens inject.

we're still behind you on cost that way and with absolutely perfect larvae management [never more than 2 per hatch], we have a 2 larvae buffer to use going roach vs a 4 warp gate.

there's a reason we build spine crawlers and turtle next to them, your army will always be better in a 4warp if we're equally good. your econ may even be better, but 2 base vs 1 you'll see diminishing returns we wont and that's how zergs win.

stalkers and zealots are fine. better than fine, they're actually good. not marauders, but still damn good.

You never go with just roach versus stalker/zealot, you add in speedlings as well. Without sentries you can trap the toss army with lings and attack with roaches. I wasn't even taking into consideration with roach speed and lair, so you will have less gas investment there. The longer the fight goes on, zerg production capabilities will overwhelm protoss 4 gate which will allow you to get equal priced armies.

 

[Pandaman]

thats 18 larvae we have to camp on.

visit the build order tester with zerg and toss, do a 5 zealot/5stalker push, count your probes and notice the time you push out.
now try to camp 18 larvae while still matching that worker count as zerg. you dont have to get ling speed, because im telling you now: you wont get ling speed.

oh yeah, and remember that camping larvae means you forgo natural hatchery production.

 

[Spl1nter]

I'm talking about a situation without any sentries which means most of your zerglings can attack. Basically, what I'm trying to say is in a realistic scenario where you have 5 zealots/5 stalkers which is 1125 minerals/250 gas. You can get 9 roaches/18 ling for 1075/225. That's 20 supply vs 27. You can add another overlord for 100 and you're about equal in mineral cost. That absolutely beats the toss army. You typically get a static defense because of the extra range needed since not all your army can attack if toss gets the proper forcefields up but without ff to control the battlefield, zerg wins that battle easily. Which goes my initial point, if you remove or severely nerf ff, you can switch the balance in favor of zerg easily.

the problem being is that what you are asking for there is at least two full rounds of larvae injects because of Ovies needed as well. During which time no drones can be made. We cant just make units magically appear from the void like a certain race.

 

[(._.)]

When opening as protoss is it a better idea to build 4 gates and just keep warping in guys to end the game fast or build 3 gates and a robo? I want to start mixing things up and trying different stuff.

 

[Spl1nter]

When opening as protoss is it a better idea to build 4 gates and just keep warping in guys to end the game fast or build 3 gates and a robo? I want to start mixing things up and trying different stuff.

It depends on what race you are facing and what type of style of game you want to play.

 

[Pandaman]

It depends on what race you are facing and what type of style of game you want to play.

and the map.

 

[IceMarker]

NeoGAF 2011 Starcraft II Invitational Finals start in under an hour!

 

[ezrarh]

the problem being is that what you are asking for there is at least two full rounds of larvae injects because of Ovies needed as well. During which time no drones can be made. We cant just make units magically appear from the void like a certain race.

Okay, I admit there is a timing where zerg would be vunerable to the protoss push which is why you have to build spinecrawlers. That's also why protoss 4 gates because if that timing window wasn't there, then it wouldn't that effective of a build. But my main argument is about gateway units versus roach/speedling at equal mineral cost armies without sentries and roach/sling wins.

 

[Procarbine]

This discussion was not about zerg holding off 4 gates, zealot/stalker rushes, or the economy surrounding these rushes. Yes, these factors are all important, but this is what the discussion is about:

You say that like it's not true? Roach/speedling beats zealot/stalker at equal priced armies but yea, maybe the cost of ff might need to be re-evaluated. Or maps with less chokes and then ff won't be as big of an issue.

The situation where this becomes important is in the early/mid game, because protoss will always have robo or something else in the army mix end game, so we aren't talking about maxed armies. This leads us to consider smallish, 20-60 supply army engagements. With no sentries you guys can't honestly tell me you wouldn't feel GREAT about smashing gateway units with roach/speedling, because I know I would.

 

[DurielBlack]

Then you're just playing bad Protoss, forcefields can't keep a 4 gate out as you can warp in up the ramp with a proxy pylon.

Well I'm gold, not diamond or master. Most of my opponents don't think of that. I'd just like a strat that beats 4-gate since thats what 95% of protoss are doing right now.

 

[Vaporak]

i wish. if it was even remotely possble to double a tosses food before a 4gate zergs would never lose to em.


overlords dont take vespene gas. unfortunately.

you build 2 stalkers, i build 3 roaches, nevermind that 2 stalkers can lol through 3 nonspeed roaches and nevermind that speed roachs require a muuuuuch heavier gas investment than core+warpgates and nevermind that stalkers warp in faster than queens inject.

we're still behind you on cost that way and with absolutely perfect larvae management [never more than 2 per hatch], we have a 2 larvae buffer to use going roach vs a 4 warp gate.

there's a reason we build spine crawlers and turtle next to them, your army will always be better in a 4warp if we're equally good. your econ may even be better, but 2 base vs 1 you'll see diminishing returns we wont and that's how zergs win.

stalkers and zealots are fine. better than fine, they're actually good. not marauders, but still damn good.

Don't be a contrarian just because he's trying to illustrate an advantage Zerg units have. 3 roaches will smash 2 stalkers in a straight up fight, it won't even be close to cost efficient for a Protoss to fight that way. Stalkers barely beat roaches 1 on 1 in the early game, and once attack/armor upgrades start Stalkers lose 1 on 1 to Roaches. Stalkers lose to Roaches per cost in the early game and per food in the late game. By no reasonable definition of "good" are zealots and stalkers good per cost or per food when compared to the T1 units of the other races. But they are "good enough" with good sentry usage.

Well I'm gold, not diamond or master. Most of my opponents don't think of that. I'd just like a strat that beats 4-gate since thats what 95% of protoss are doing right now.

In PvP the only strategy that is for sure better than an offensive 4 gate is a defensive economical 4 gate. Once the warp in trick was discovered every quick tech or FE build was voided. The only time it's safe to do anything besides 4 gate or 2 gate is when your opponent has decided to not 4 gate or proxy 2 gate, respectively. Welcome to PvP, I hope you like micro.

At gold though most any strategy is fine, just focus on macroing harder and not forgetting detection.

 

[Pandaman]

Don't be a contrarian just because he's trying to illustrate an advantage Zerg units have. 3 roaches will smash 2 stalkers in a straight up fight, it won't even be close to cost efficient for a Protoss to fight that way. Stalkers barely beat roaches 1 on 1 in the early game, and once attack/armor upgrades start Stalkers lose 1 on 1 to Roaches. Stalkers lose to Roaches per cost in the early game and per food in the late game. By no reasonable definition of "good" are zealots and stalkers good per cost or per food when compared to the T1 units of the other races. But they are "good enough" with good sentry usage.

now if you can talk protoss into not abusing the fact that stalkers are the longest ranged and fastest unupped t1 units in the game, then i might fight them in a fair fight once or twice. there's a reason zergs prefer speedling/crawler defenses, and its not because roaches are good versus stalkers.

its not my problem if you dont move your units, but that doesnt suddenly make them bad.

 

[Vaporak]

now if you can talk protoss into not abusing the fact that stalkers are the longest ranged and fastest unupped t1 units in the game, then i might fight them in a fair fight once or twice. there's a reason zergs prefer speedling/crawler defenses, and its not because roaches are good versus stalkers.

its not my problem if you dont move your units, but that doesnt suddenly make them bad.

Roaches are slightly faster than Stalkers on creep without speed upgrade, if you're fighting on creep there is no kiting going on. If you have speed zerglings, or non speed zerglings on creep, and decent micro there is no kiting going on. Don't dodge the issue just because Zergs have a martyr complex, admitting you have one advantage over one specific unit combination isn't going to change the balance at all.

 

[Pandaman]

Roaches are slightly faster than Stalkers on creep without speed upgrade, if you're fighting on creep there is no kiting going on. If you have speed zerglings, or non speed zerglings on creep, and decent micro there is no kiting going on. Don't dodge the issue just because Zergs have a martyr complex, admitting you have one advantage over one specific unit combination isn't going to change the balance at all.

so now zerg can magic up a few tumours while also doubling toss food.

wow its amazing zergs dont win every zvp

spoiler: zerg has more to worry about than a 50 gas upgrade to make its units viable. zerg cant actually get speedlings AND roaches for a 4gate and also expand to have the larvae they need to live.

furthermore, creep speed isnt good enough to end stalker kiting, what games do you play? the range advantage and the creeps limits makes it easy to take a set of shots and walk away again, forcing zerg to retreat back deeper into the creep again.

slow lings cant deal with stalkers. no.

and lol at the martyr complex comment coming from a protoss. no zergs here are complaining about stalker/zealot or 4gates. its protoss crying that they'd be hopeless on offense when that's absurd. sentryless 4gates vs zerg happen all the time and they win games. if you guys need sentrys badly, its not for zvp.

 

[Vaporak]

so now zerg can magic up a few tumours while also doubling toss food.

wow its amazing zergs dont win every zvp

spoiler: zerg has more to worry about than a 50 gas upgrade to make its units viable. zerg cant actually get speedlings AND roaches for a 4gate and also expand to have the larvae they need to live.

furthermore, creep speed isnt good enough to end stalker kiting, what games do you play? the range advantage and the creeps limits makes it easy to take a set of shots and walk away again, forcing zerg to retreat back deeper into the creep again.

slow lings cant deal with stalkers. no.

and lol at the martyr complex comment coming from a protoss. no zergs here are complaining about stalker/zealot or 4gates. its protoss crying that they'd be hopeless on offense when that's absurd. sentryless 4gates vs zerg happen all the time and they win games. if you guys need sentrys badly, its not for zvp.

1) No one here is talking about a specific 4 gate timing but you panda, we're talking about ling/bling/roach vs zealot/stalker. You bringing up 4gate as a is a complete straw man.
2) If you're on creep, Stalkers can back off after shooting but not before getting hit by the roaches because of the time it takes to do the attack animation, hence they're not kiting.
3) Slow lings move faster than stalkers on creep and are equal speed off creep. On creep that means surrounds are possible, and off creep it means only about 2 free shots for stalkers if they're willing to leave the zealots behind.
4) QQ more. That the zealot and stalker are the weakest T1 units is not even debated in the competitive community anymore, that you don't agree is just you not wanting to admit that Zergs have any advantages at all in the matchups.

These aren't complex abstract facts that are hard to pin down, they are easily empirically verified and have been countless times by the community at large. If you don't agree at this point it's up to you to provide evidence to the contrary.

 

[Pandaman]

1) No one here is talking about a specific 4 gate timing but you panda, we're talking about ling/bling/roach vs zealot/stalker. You bringing up 4gate as a is a complete straw man.

bringing up actual real world situation where zealot/stalker regularly beats slow roach/ling [to the point that most zergs are now completely forgoing roach until lair] is a strawman, but appealing to map editor balance is fine. did i step into bizarro world somewhere down the line?

2) If you're on creep, Stalkers can back off after shooting but not before getting hit by the roaches because of the time it takes to do the attack animation, hence they're not kiting.

then you take a second shot and kite off creep or get a free shot because you're controlling creep spread and zerg is forced to retreat. then your shields regen and zerg has to deal with you again. and again. and again until roach speed kicks in and boots stalkers away for good.

you might aswell say marines cant kite lings because lings are faster, thats stupid as fuck and you only say it because we're talking about protoss units for once.

3) Slow lings move faster than stalkers on creep and are equal speed off creep. On creep that means surrounds are possible, and off creep it means only about 2 free shots for stalkers if they're willing to leave the zealots behind.

first things first: lol at bringing zealots in with you when harassing slow lings.

second things second: creep slow lings are still too slow to catch stalkers for surrounds unless protoss messes up. they have to close 7 range to even get in the first shot, let alone surround. protoss can take a shot and once again walk off the creep into their pylon where there zealots will be waiting for lings dumb enough to walk off creep. furthermore, slow lings have cooldown and acceleration issues, ever notice how long it takes for a set of lings to catch a worker? how it'll hit the worker and fall behind? protoss can abuse this to take shots and only get scratches without worry of surrounds. i dont know how fast you think slow lings are, but they're not fast enough to close 8 hexes before a stalker gets off creep. if protoss has a few zeals by the pylon, lings have to retreat and then we lose all our lings anyway because the stalkers have 7 range to work with before the lings pull away.

4) QQ more. That the zealot and stalker are the weakest T1 units is not even debated in the competitive community anymore, that you don't agree is just you not wanting to admit that Zergs have any advantages at all in the matchups.

sure is nice to just throw away arguments and say 'durr, everyone agrees with me, so QQ more'.
arguing is hard after all, logic so confusing.

These aren't complex abstract facts that are hard to pin down, they are easily empirically verified and have been countless times by the community at large. If you don't agree at this point it's up to you to provide evidence to the contrary.

i provide:
-the zvp 1 gas 4gate build.
-mrbitters zvp gosucoaching with ret: ret says speed first safest opening, hatch/pool, pool/hatch is purely defensive and needs alot of crawlers, go roach/ling as a midgame.
-mrbitters zvp gosucoaching with machine: where he supports speed/crawler versus 4gate because it cant be kited.
see also the 6gate counter build video where he counters by rushing for speed/burrow roach.

you wont find a zerg out of bronze league who even dreams of pushing out before speed, sentries or not. if slow ling/slow roach could match zealot/stalker on open ground, zealot/stalker 4gates wouldn't even exist. but they do and they're the strongest fastest type of 4gate specifically because it abuses slow units.

its absurd that you're saying I'm QQing, I'm not complaining about zealot/stalker being op, im not saying they're unstoppable, I'm giving examples of builds that easily stop them, but somehow its a martyr complex? waah, zerg has to do XYZ easy mode low micro build to stop something fairly easy to scout [1 gas before stalker]. it's you QQing that protoss units are completely nonviable.

 

[Feep]

Well, I was getting tired of 4-gate against FE Zergs, so I decided to try a quick expand myself...at something around 25 supply.

I'm not sure if it would work normally, but this Zerg was pretty passive, and it ended up becoming my favorite game of SCII to date.

Game length: 33 minutes

In this game, I warped in the following units: Zealots, Stalkers, Sentries, Observers, Phoenix, Void Rays, Carriers, Mothership, Dark Templar (and had the Templar Archives up, but the game ended before I could use it).

Man, games so rarely get there, but the mothership is so fucking awesome. Against Zerg, bring Stalkers + Snipe Overseers. I used Vortex TWICE to great effect (though goddammit I totally forgot about the Archon toilet technique; I could have done it, too!), barely held off some pushes with some DTs...

I love games like this. All tech options = win.

 

[Pandaman]

Well, I was getting tired of 4-gate against FE Zergs, so I decided to try a quick expand myself...at something around 25 supply.

I'm not sure if it would work normally, but this Zerg was pretty passive, and it ended up becoming my favorite game of SCII to date.

Game length: 33 minutes

In this game, I warped in the following units: Zealots, Stalkers, Sentries, Observers, Phoenix, Void Rays, Carriers, Mothership, Dark Templar (and had the Templar Archives up, but the game ended before I could use it).

Man, games so rarely get there, but the mothership is so fucking awesome. Against Zerg, bring Stalkers + Snipe Overseers. I used Vortex TWICE to great effect (though goddammit I totally forgot about the Archon toilet technique; I could have done it, too!), barely held off some pushes with some DTs...

I love games like this. All tech options = win.

play with gaf, everyones passive but splinter and a few 4gaters.

 

[Procarbine]

play with gaf, everyones passive but splinter and a few 4gaters.

I'm not passive if I smell blood.

 

[Pandaman]

I'm not passive if I smell blood.

so pro.

 

[IceMarker]

so pro.

Haha! It's in his name!

 

[Pandaman]

Haha! It's in his name!

the best part of my first game was people freaking out over the heart and you suddenly having to cast.

 

[Vaporak]

bringing up actual real world situation where zealot/stalker regularly beats slow roach/ling [to the point that most zergs are now completely forgoing roach until lair] is a strawman, but appealing to map editor balance is fine. did i step into bizarro world somewhere down the line?

Example situation has X property, therefore all situations have X property. It's a fallacy, I know it, you know it, don't do it. You position is that Zealot/Stalker is good vs Ling/Bling/Roach, not that it's good at specific times.

then you take a second shot and kite off creep or get a free shot because you're controlling creep spread and zerg is forced to retreat. then your shields regen and zerg has to deal with you again. and again. and again until roach speed kicks in and boots stalkers away for good.

you might aswell say marines cant kite lings because lings are faster, thats stupid as fuck and you only say it because we're talking about protoss units for once.

Again, specific situation therefore general conclusions. You only address a situation when the stalker is at the edge of the creep trying to take pot shots at a roach. Does this mean you concede that a stalker can't kite a slow roach when the fight is on the creep, as per my claim? Second, marines without stim can't kite zerglings on creep and I don't know why you would think the truth is stupid. Kiting means they can attack and then move away such that they take no damage while killing their target. Stalkers can kite Zealots, Roaches can kite Zealots, Stalkers can kite slow roaches off creep. Stalkers and marines can't kite slow zerglings on creep.

first things first: lol at bringing zealots in with you when harassing slow lings.

second things second: creep slow lings are still too slow to catch stalkers for surrounds unless protoss messes up. they have to close 7 range to even get in the first shot, let alone surround. protoss can take a shot and once again walk off the creep into their pylon where there zealots will be waiting for lings dumb enough to walk off creep. furthermore, slow lings have cooldown and acceleration issues, ever notice how long it takes for a set of lings to catch a worker? how it'll hit the worker and fall behind? protoss can abuse this to take shots and only get scratches without worry of surrounds. i dont know how fast you think slow lings are, but they're not fast enough to close 8 hexes before a stalker gets off creep. if protoss has a few zeals by the pylon, lings have to retreat and then we lose all our lings anyway because the stalkers have 7 range to work with before the lings pull away.

Why would you lol, we're talking about how zealot/stalker holds up against ling/bling/roach in a fight. Second, you again only cite the case of stalkers taking pot shots at the edge of creep, does that mean you concede the case when the fight is taking place on the creep, which is the claim I made? For the record, slow lings on creep have a speed of 5.156 compared to Stalkers speed of 2.95.

sure is nice to just throw away arguments and say 'durr, everyone agrees with me, so QQ more'.
arguing is hard after all, logic so confusing.

I asked for evidence, I'm perfectly willing to put the debate on hold while you run some tests and ask around.

i provide:
-the zvp 1 gas 4gate build.
-mrbitters zvp gosucoaching with ret: ret says speed first safest opening, hatch/pool, pool/hatch is purely defensive and needs alot of crawlers, go roach/ling as a midgame.
-mrbitters zvp gosucoaching with machine: where he supports speed/crawler versus 4gate because it cant be kited.
see also the 6gate counter build video where he counters by rushing for speed/burrow roach.

you wont find a zerg out of bronze league who even dreams of pushing out before speed, sentries or not. if slow ling/slow roach could match zealot/stalker on open ground, zealot/stalker 4gates wouldn't even exist. but they do and they're the strongest fastest type of 4gate specifically because it abuses slow units.

its absurd that you're saying I'm QQing, I'm not complaining about zealot/stalker being op, im not saying they're unstoppable, I'm giving examples of builds that easily stop them, but somehow its a martyr complex? waah, zerg has to do XYZ easy mode low micro build to stop something fairly easy to scout [1 gas before stalker]. it's you QQing that protoss units are completely nonviable.

That all either agree's with my position or only supports your position for one specific timing, not the general case:
-Specific case where the Protoss tries to attack with a larger force, doesn't demonstrate your position that zealot/roach is good against ling/bling/roach in even investments as a 4 gate army vs a 14hatch zerg tries be a larger unit investment than what the zerg has as his army at the time.
-Evidence for MY position, you're admitting that after defending a 4 gate roach/ling is a good go to unit mix.
-Again a specifc case where Protoss tries to attack with a much larger army investment than the zerg and most likely doesn't have much creep spread. This is essentially point 1.
-Evidence for my position, saying that the counter to a gateway push is roaches.

The second paragraph is a straw man, no where can you quote me saying that slow lings and slow roaches would beat zealot/stalker away from creep in the middle of the map.

Third Paragraph, again a strawman, you can't quote me saying that Zealots and Stalkers are completely nonviable, because I never said it. I don't know how you can possibly think I'm QQing, when I'm the one who said Zealots and Stalkers were good enough in the matchup.

Now, In order for my position to be false, and implicity you'res to be true, you must furnish evidence that 1) Zealot/Stalker can fight cost for cost (including food) against Ling/Bling/Roach in general, not at a specific time. OR 2) That you accept 1 but can demonstrate that a Protoss is always able to invest more in a Zealot/Stalker army in order to over come the cost inefficiency. This is what it MEANS for Zealot/Stalker to be a good vs Ling/Bling/Roach. If you can't supply this, but also maintain your position, then we'll just have to go our separate ways, as nothing will come of this debate.

 

[Darklord]

I tried switching to the NA servers in-game from the AUS one but it said my battle.net account doesn't have an associated copy of SC2. I thought the Aus version could just switch in-game? Do I actually need to buy another copy or do I need to do something else?

 

[Pandaman]

Example situation has X property, therefore all situations have X property. It's a fallacy, I know it, you know it, don't do it. You position is that Zealot/Stalker is good vs Ling/Bling/Roach, not that it's good at specific times.

zealot/stalker vs ling/roach will only ever happen at specific times. outside of the rare blink plays, protoss tech out of gateway in favour of splash or stronger harass.

when roach/ling gets a massive upgrade advantage, ofcourse it will win, but you're the one being foolish by not acknowledging that those upgrades are neccasarry for roach/ling to take advantage of gateway and the typical lack of gateway tech responses. if you guys got charge/blink and fought ling/roach, it would then be an even fight. typically you dont because colossi are just better and there are some production issues to deal with. burrow forcing detection being a big one, if you need a robo anyway its better to switch into heavier counters like immortal/collossi.

Again, specific situation therefore general conclusions. You only address a situation when the stalker is at the edge of the creep trying to take pot shots at a roach. Does this mean you concede that a stalker can't kite a slow roach when the fight is on the creep, as per my claim?

yes, stalkers shouldnt camp on creep. 'dont camp on creep' does not mean dont harass and whittle down until/if you get to the point where you can just swamp in. if you use your shield ability you will do enourmous damage for cost against a zerg who didnt prepare but otherwise defended properly.

Second, marines without stim can't kite zerglings on creep and I don't know why you would think the truth is stupid.

yeah, thats why hatch first marine harass ends the second the natural pops. except when it doesnt. hatch creep spread is small enough that marines and stalkers can step in and harass while still having time to kite/retreat to the edge versus slow lings. in stalkers case, they can do it to roaches too.

if t/p overstep their bounds, they'll be dead, but player mistakes dont address unit viability. at all.

Kiting means they can attack and then move away such that they take no damage while killing their target. Stalkers can kite Zealots, Roaches can kite Zealots, Stalkers can kite slow roaches off creep. Stalkers and marines can't kite slow zerglings on creep.

this is your own personal definition, not the popular one.
i have no reason to agree with it.

Kiting (to kite) is to move units around to make the enemy chase them and thus not be able to attack as much, or not at all.
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Kiting

Stalkers can be used early game against Roaches because of their higher mobility, longer range, and attack bonus against armored units. While the Stalker should not be considered the hard counter to early Roaches, they can be helpful in keeping an aggressive Zerg player at bay by using proper micro.
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Stalker#Vs._Zerg

hey whatdayaknow.

Why would you lol, we're talking about how zealot/stalker holds up against ling/bling/roach in a fight. Second, you again only cite the case of stalkers taking pot shots at the edge of creep, does that mean you concede the case when the fight is taking place on the creep, which is the claim I made?

to-wit i respond, if you're fighting on creep you are doing it wrong. its your problem for being bad, not the units. zerg cannot spread creep when you're sitting at the edge. you can enforce limited creep spread easily, you have no reason to sit on creep ever unless you're tumour hunting with an obs.

For the record, slow lings on creep have a speed of 5.156 compared to Stalkers speed of 2.95.

for the record, get the fuck out of here if you dont even know the hard numbers you are arguing.
slow lings: 2.95
slow lings on creep: 3.8

creep is not a 175% modifier. i fricken wish.

i dont know where

I asked for evidence, I'm perfectly willing to put the debate on hold while you run some tests and ask around.

you have demonstrated a massive issue of misinformation, which means your experiences are now in doubt. I now win on a purely 'he said, she said' basis.

That all either agree's with my position or only supports your position for one specific timing, not the general case:
-Specific case where the Protoss tries to attack with a larger force, doesn't demonstrate your position that zealot/roach is good against ling/bling/roach in even investments as a 4 gate army vs a 14hatch zerg tries be a larger unit investment than what the zerg has as his army at the time.

counterpoint:
destiny cloudfist is a good build.
lifting to the island and doing a destiny cloudfist 30 minutes into the game is not a good build.

its almost as if other things change the balance of the fight as the game goes on. as if these units do not exist in a vacuum where they magically appear in their vanilla state with equal foods.

-Evidence for MY position, you're admitting that after defending a 4 gate roach/ling is a good go to unit mix.
-Again a specifc case where Protoss tries to attack with a much larger army investment than the zerg and most likely doesn't have much creep spread. This is essentially point 1.
-Evidence for my position, saying that the counter to a gateway push is roaches.

moronic.

the counter to pure vanilla gateway isnt roach/ling, its roach/ling with 100/100 150/100 100/100 100/100 worth of tech behind it. ofcourse when the zerg dumps massive amounts of resources into upgrading his units will become more cost efficient when all you do is spend 50/50 to build yours faster.

once again, if vanilla vs vanilla army roach/ling was viable, why the fuck would we be bothering to tech when we could just turtle into a bigger vanilla army and swamp you in a vanilla fight anywhere on the map? im not talking situations where we're teching to stay even versus a collossus timing, im talking pure 6 gate or 4gate allin where toss has no motivation to do anything but chrono more warpgates and we know it. why would anyone risk tech if thats a fight we could just straight up win?

The second paragraph is a straw man, no where can you quote me saying that slow lings and slow roaches would beat zealot/stalker away from creep in the middle of the map.

thats because your insistence on the presence of creep is the first and biggest strawman. creep is limited. to a very small area. an area that does not typically prevent a toss from harassing. and i drop double tumour in every game i 14 hatch. the only time protoss are forced into fighting on creep hardcore is jungle basin.

Third Paragraph, again a strawman, you can't quote me saying that Zealots and Stalkers are completely nonviable, because I never said it. I don't know how you can possibly think I'm QQing, when I'm the one who said Zealots and Stalkers were good enough in the matchup.

"By no reasonable definition of "good" are zealots and stalkers good per cost or per food when compared to the T1 units of the other races. But they are "good enough" with good sentry usage."

do you need to be reminded of the topic i was discussing with ezrarh, because maybe you were too busy looking for a chance to be contrarian.

Now, In order for my position to be false, and implicity you'res to be true, you must furnish evidence that 1) Zealot/Stalker can fight cost for cost (including food) against Ling/Bling/Roach in general, not at a specific time.

no i dont. the topic of disucssion is starcraft. specifically balance in a melee situation, if you want to masturbate to the map editor, thats your business but you aren't using it as a red herring here in this discussion.

i could make a map editor where its 100 food and cost of ling bane vs 80% zealot and 20% stalkers. in that editor i could suicide all the banes into stalkers and point to the zealots raping the lings. i think we both agree that wouldn't actually mean anything. map editor balance has more to do with the person setting the scenario than the actual units. even if we could mutually agree on two perfectly balanced unit compositions and line them up like redcoats, that still wont mean anything for an actual game. map editor gives us wonderfully stupid things like 1 phoenix kills infinite mutalisk and marauders kiting zealots into forever, after all.

OR 2) That you accept 1 but can demonstrate that a Protoss is always able to invest more in a Zealot/Stalker army in order to over come the cost inefficiency. This is what it MEANS for Zealot/Stalker to be a good vs Ling/Bling/Roach. If you can't supply this, but also maintain your position, then we'll just have to go our separate ways, as nothing will come of this debate.

well im obviously not going this route.
protoss can invst more because of their cost efficiency in real world situations. a zealot might only cost 1 larvae, but stalkers cost at minimum 2 apiece. kiting small sections of armies enforces larvae constraints on droning which protoss and terran do not share. to properly defend against many protoss allins require zergs to cut and match protoss harvester counts, with small advantages garnred through unit control granting the successful player the ability to grow his tech or econ.

or in short, in these type of game situations the better player will win. the zerg for properly managing his larvae and unit control throughout the pressure or the protoss who controls creep and manages his units for the absolute best cost and harasses zergs own ability to manage his econ.

P.S. i think its cute banelings have now made an appearance, as if they've ever been cost effective versus toss. it takes 5 of them to kill a zealot, thats 250/125. thats alot of splash you need to bank on to be efficient.

 

[Pandaman]

because im such a nice guy and i really shouldnt have to demonstrate how ridiculously safe creep harass can be vs vanilla zerg.

here is some fun from the editor.

here is the maximum range of a stalker firing at a ling infront of a hatchery:
http://i.imgur.com/qvPwR.jpg

i think we can all agree that there's no way in frosty hell that zergling will catch that stalker before its off creep.

and here is a stalker range for firing at a hatchery if units are deeper into the creep.
http://i.imgur.com/7zHyz.jpg
so now the question is, can protoss harass this hatchery and escape before risking an attack or surround from the fastest vanilla zerg unit. lings on creep.

as you can see:
http://i.imgur.com/DRYmX.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/K8z1L.jpg
i had ample time to run the ling well into stalkers maximum range, take a screenshot and still get off the creep before the zerglings 1.8 speed advantage allowed for it to catch up.

anyone who has ever done a one gas 4gate versus a fast hatch will know this. i have no idea how anyone with even bronze league levels of experience could have doubted the truth of it. if you are surrounded on creep in this situation, it is player error. you did not scout a surround or you got greedy.

 

[mescalineeyes]

I just think toss got way too comfortable with their forcefields turtling behind their base until they can get 2 colossi and then a-move to win against most zerg and now that the balance of that spell is in doubt they are losing their minds trying to argue the importance of forcefields.

I'm with sen on this one, forcefields that early are fucking imba.

 

[Pandaman]

I just think toss got way too comfortable with their forcefields turtling behind their base until they can get 2 colossi and then a-move to win against most zerg and now that the balance of that spell is in doubt they are losing their minds trying to argue the importance of forcefields.

I'm with sen on this one, forcefields that early are fucking imba.

this is pretty much exactly what i believe.

the answer is alternative builds from the protoss, but they're all so comfortable with their current greedy playstyles where they are safe with much smaller army potential because they have forcefield to allow them to tech. they're terrified of a zerg equivalent to a 4gate forcing them into builds they havent practiced.

 

[mescalineeyes]

this is pretty much exactly what i believe.

the answer is alternative builds from the protoss, but they're all so comfortable with their current greedy playstyles where they are safe with much smaller army potential because they have forcefield to allow them to tech.

nailed it.

it's not that something is inherently wrong with forcefields.

Protoss can forcefield their ramp, Terran can wall off -- but Zerg? Zerg's the race that needs to expand the most yet has the least ability to fortify their positions while at the same time having to split larvae into overlords, units and most importantly drones. ... and if we miss an inject, we're fucked.
Now put into this context, how do tier 1.5 forcefields make any sense?

 

[Ikuu]

I'd rather than take a look at the 200/200 Protoss death ball (Sentry, Stalker, Void Ray, Collosus) that just steamrolls Zerg, and don't bother with this "But you can just remax right away!" as the death ball just rolls that, so as a Zerg you need to make like 3 full armies to win.

 

[mescalineeyes]

I'd rather than take a look at the 200/200 Protoss death ball that just steamrolls Zerg, and don't bother with this "But you can just remax right away!" as the death ball just rolls that, so as a Zerg you need to make like 3 full armies to win.

of course you can just remax right away... as long as you didn't forget to do your injects!!!

No other race has this unforgiving mechanics and is pretty much not rewarded for playing "right" yet instantly punished for messing up.

I'm almost mad at myself for not sticking with Terran way back when. Playing Zerg has caused me nothing but headaches.

 

[Ikuu]

Any T/P player should try and play Zerg for a week or so and see how it is, I get the feeling that they don't believe what Zergs are saying about the state of the race. Zerg really is the easiest race to lose with, and you will lose to people much worse than you way more than you do as the other two.

 

[mescalineeyes]

Any T/P player should try and play Zerg for a week or so and see how it is, I get the feeling that they don't believe what Zergs are saying about the state of the race. Zerg really is the easiest race to lose with, and you will lose to people much worse than you way more than you do as the other two.

BUT THAT'S NOT TRUE, TERRAN HAS ONLY BEEN DOMINATING LATELY BECAUSE THEIR PLAYERS ARE SO MUCH BETTER.

"k try zerg, walk a fucking mile in our shoes."

NO ZERG IS BULLSHIT/SLIMY/GROSS/TERRAN IS TEH MASTERRACE! LOL

pretty much every conversation I've ever had with Devil up to this point about race balance.
I love the kid, but he's a fucking douche when it comes to this.

 

[IceMarker]

Zerg party on this page woooooooooo

Spoiler

Oh wait I are Random idc lol!

 

[fanboi]

http://www.youtube.com/user/PsyStarcraft#p/u/0/sRjJRIl0uxg

I'm masturbating here.

 

[ezrarh]

Wow Panda. You're taking this way further than it has to be. No one's denying that zerg isn't the hardest race to play at the moment. My previous argument wasn't taking into every external factors you're bringing up. The inherent nature of it is to be able to get a bigger army earlier than zerg and is almost all-inish so of course it will have a timing window where the protoss has a larger army. Otherwise nobody would do it but the longer the protoss fights, zerg will simply outproduce him and can over run with sling/roach. That's all I'm saying. Is it easier to 4gate than whatever else you have to do? Yea sure but at our current level of play, you can overcome it and when whatever issues are addressed, you'll come out better.

 

[TheRagnCajun]

Just quit Zerg and join Terran already.

 

[mescalineeyes]

Just quit Zerg and join Terran already.

I happen to love playing Zerg, I am merely saying that it's harder to win in the current metagame and unfairly so.

 

[IceMarker]

I happen to love playing Zerg, I am merely saying that it's harder to win in the current metagame and unfairly so.

I feel like we're repeating history here.