Deep late-game PvZ (Return of the Mothership)

Protoss Discussion
Not 100% sure but ROOT.Catz might have invented this style.
04/26/2013 06:33 AMPosted by Magnet
And last but not least, I don't see how you can criticize the decisions people make when you are not capable of playing at their level.

You really don't understand the tempation to do this? You really don't understand how people grinding away out 1000s of games to work on their mechanics and still not getting those mechanics down might want to find a way to participate in "a real game", even second hand?

You don't understand the temptation to look for opportunities in decision making in someone else's replay, opportunities which by your own admission you thought were viable until you had a chance to test them and see why they didn't work?

Pride and self-deception (I'm as good as that guy or better) are pretty fundamental aspects of human psychology, and no one is immune. People are as apt to look down on people more talented than they as people who are less so. And there are also some pretty smart people who fail in strategy, mechanics, or situational awareness.

Look, you're not only way better at this game than I ever will be, but you're a pretty smart guy. So if you say, "Come on, I'm good at this game. I've *tried* that. Don't be a jerk and stay on topic", I'm 100% behind you. But if you say "You're bad, so don't criticize me", you may manage to scare off some of the trolls, but is that really the best way to handle it? There's enough BM based purely on rank going around, and I hate to see it fed, even indirectly. Especially since some of those "baddies" you knock down will end up making Master league and end up coming back as the same !@#$%^-s, but with a badge behind them.
Though the person in this thread who was criticizing a better player didn't do a good job, it is possible to criticize a better player. Knowing accurate theory in the abstract is a different matter than knowing how to put it into practice on the fly.
Look, you're not only way better at this game than I ever will be, but you're a pretty smart guy. So if you say, "Come on, I'm good at this game. I've *tried* that. Don't be a jerk and stay on topic", I'm 100% behind you. But if you say "You're bad, so don't criticize me", you may manage to scare off some of the trolls, but is that really the best way to handle it? There's enough BM based purely on rank going around, and I hate to see it fed, even indirectly. Especially since some of those "baddies" you knock down will end up making Master league and end up coming back as the same !@#$%^-s, but with a badge behind them.


I've tried the entire gauntlet of responses. The only theme is that "I am a higher rank than you.. don't you think I would have already progressed past the mindset you're in right now?". It's the same concept as criticizing a pro player for things you don't understand - I feel it is a safe assumption to think they have already considered the solution you are posting from several leagues down, and if it actually was a solution, it would be plainly obvious to them and they would do it. There's a reason they don't, and people should be able to recognize that on their own, or at least that's my hope.
Though the person in this thread who was criticizing a better player didn't do a good job, it is possible to criticize a better player. Knowing accurate theory in the abstract is a different matter than knowing how to put it into practice on the fly.


The only difference is that I am not asking for criticism, but rather showing an example of what a game can evolve into in which people have not seen or experienced yet.

The other side of it is that they are criticizing me based purely on information I didn't know or couldn't know throughout the game. If they were put into the same position, it'd be a 15 minute game with them losing rather than a 52 minute game where I explored the deep caverns of late-game PvZ, and they wouldn't have that knowledge anyway. Rather than being grateful of what the replay shows and the possibilities that will no doubt manifest themselves, they focus on how I could have played better and told me why I lost, which is completely not the reason this thread is up. So the people that miss the point and don't observe the knowledge being dropped are going to be the ones that get into this situation someday and cry Zerg OP, when a solution has already been posted for months prior to their !@#$%ing.

If people miss the point, that's their own fault. I clearly stated what the purpose of the thread was, yet people feel it's their place to criticize me when that wasn't the point at all. If a Diamond player can criticize me, don't you think I would have arrived at the same if not many more criticisms of myself after watching the same replay?
I feel Z is very overpowered against P late game. I think Viper abduct is simply too easy for a Z player to take away a 300/200 cost unit it's quite unfair and allows Z to overrun P way too easily I feel.

Guess I'm not at the stage/level to say anything of substance but all the MLG games and the Korean Starleague games I've been watching... HEAVILY favours Z in PvZ...
I don't think this is the next step of PvZ, but it is worth noting that the consensus is that tempest + HT is pretty much unstoppable. However, it is an integral part of late game anything to push and pull the other player in as many different directions as possible, any higher level player would tell you so. Part of sniping outer bases like that is not getting your stuff fungaled and abducted, and part of it is making him split an army that can't inherently be split. It's a good idea.
I feel it is a safe assumption to think they have already considered the solution you are posting from several leagues down, and if it actually was a solution, it would be plainly obvious to them and they would do it. There's a reason they don't, and people should be able to recognize that on their own, or at least that's my hope.

And that's typically the case, but not always. In the beta, I watched pros struggle through plenty of things I already knew before they surpassed my knowledge of the new units and the metagame. Doesn't mean I could ever take a game off them even while they're learning, but it nicely illustrates that solid execution of what you know is more valuable than knowing more in SC2 and that game knowledge is easier to pick up than mechanics, especially when your mechanics are good enough to allow reliable testing. And then you see things like InControl screwing up a blink build and dropping a game to a diamond player in Playhem.

People know mechanics matter more than strategy, people don't know what they don't know, and there are some Master-level players around the forums that can barely express a coherent argument (and don't have the patience to try). So you're *never* going to be completely rid of the "armchair quarterbacks" as long as people have any excuse to think whatever separates a good player from them "isn't a big deal".

I can understand your frustration with that. Here you are sharing what you know in an attempt to help, the experimental results of games being played out with mechanics (and equivalent game knowledge) beyond what 99% of active players can execute. Then some idiot calls you bad because your observers are out of position and you don't execute some theoretical attack you know to be a poor decision. That's not helping, it's a blatant attempt to feel better by putting someone else down. And that would have been the case even if he were a GM: his criticism should *still* have been constrained to the issue at hand and handled politely if relevant.

But you're never going to get good responses out of the trolls: they are trolls. Your audience is really the people sitting on the sidelines. I can't tell you you're never allowed to get frustrated and snap out, but my perspective is: take the moral high ground and don't let the bastards get you down. :) And you've mostly done that, but the differentiation between the bastards and the people worth talking to isn't that they're bad players, it's that they're arrogant jerks. I suppose I'm a little over-sensitive to people using "you're bad" as an insult in and of itself, when I know I'm a smart guy who's spent a lot of time and effort to improve... and is still "bad". :(
Eh. For what it's worth.
Well said. No arguments here.
04/26/2013 06:33 AMPosted by Magnet
"What should I have done if I had full map vision the entire game?"
The point was I didn't have full map vision the entire game and I still would have done things wildly different than you that probably would have ended up in me winning. That Zerg was fairly bad but you let him get an army that you couldn't handle and decided to fight on his terms. Every Protoss I've ever seen face a Swarm Host based death army has always won by not attacking in to them.

You're just assuming people are watching a replay and because you have no respect for them (namely because they disagree with you) you write them off as having God's eye view. Which is caustic. Your opening to your post wasn't asking for help but you used yourself as a stepping stone for a build that ("we" as) the Protoss community should use. Therefore giving us the right to criticize your evidence. You could have posted a LiquidHero game and we would have criticized that as well.

04/26/2013 06:33 AMPosted by Magnet
I don't see how you can criticize the decisions people make when you are not capable of playing at their level.
It's pretty easy because I can tell just by watching that you're actually not that much better than me. I'd be arrogant enough to say you're about AS good as me. I just haven't played HotS much to pop in to Masters. Or, maybe it's just PvZ and yours currently isn't very good while mine is. Maybe your PvT is better and mine isn't. As puCK (now Leiya) told me you can get Masters in a month just through sheer numbers of games.
That Zerg was pretty bad though.

the way I chose to engage in situations that I am unfamiliar with is what lost me the game. Hence, that is the point of this thread.
Correct, but adding a Mothership is a composition change, not really an engagement change. The way your OP is posted you make it seem like you're going to engage the same way, head on, but this time with Cloak!

Well, regardless. The best thing to do is what you've done in the past. Post replays of you doing it. You never posted a replay of you sucking. So make it work and then come back.

04/26/2013 09:07 AMPosted by Magnet
"I am a higher rank than you.. don't you think I would have already progressed past the mindset you're in right now?".
Honestly, no. There are terrible Masters players out there.
04/26/2013 09:10 AMPosted by Magnet
If they were put into the same position, it'd be a 15 minute game with them losing rather than a 52 minute game where I explored the deep caverns of late-game PvZ,
The problem is statements like this (which are not uncharacteristic of you, especially after you got in to Masters) which throw yourself on to a high pedestal. It makes people dislike you.

Fact of the matter is, that Zerg was approximately Diamond in skill and he just used a powerful composition (not unlike Broodfestor) that you LET HIM get and then proceeded to play in to his hands.

To be fair though, you're right. It wouldn't have been a 52 minute game. It would have been maybe a 26 minute game with me winning. :)

04/26/2013 09:10 AMPosted by Magnet
Rather than being grateful of what the replay shows and the possibilities that will no doubt manifest themselves, they focus on how I could have played better and told me why I lost,
Your replay + OP post only shows that you'd now lose with a Mothership instead of without it.
Who are some Masters players who you regularly and reliably beat, Razgriz?
"That Zerg was fairly bad", and he is much better than you. Stopped reading right there.
Seriously, Razgriz? That's how you want to play it?
At the risk of being told how bad I am by random tools, here's a replay of the Motherships in action in a late game PvZ:

http://drop.sc/327842

And I use the plural form because I build at least 5 of the things. Some ideas I've got to improve:

- Need to improve micro of Mothership to avoid losing it so frequently
- Shoulda sacked workers to get more Tempests at the end

In the end, I think that the concept of the Mothership negating the Swarm Host is proven (despite the errors that both of us make)
This is a better example, I think. Fricken long though!

http://drop.sc/327852

I'm holding him off successfully enough, but seem to be struggling to push back. Too worried about losing all my stuff to Viper / Spore / Hydra - which ends up happening anyway :/

Sidewinder (Magnet), have you got any ideas on how I can improve (please have a look at this game and let me know your thoughts!)
I am watching it.

Watch your opening game chronoboost and probe production. It makes a pretty big different if you dump chrono into probes after forge expanding and verifying a 3rd base.

I like that little pressure timing with the Zealots and MSC, but get the recall off and save those units if you can. It was clear that everything was just going to die, but if you save it then those 4 Zealots are really handy for when you want to take your 3rd base.

You badly need to spend your money during this attack, too. 4 Zealots should never kill a base, so just have them fight and check back every so often to get the recall off. In fact, during this time your money is so high that he should have been able to just make stuff and kill you. Can't afford to get away with this in higher leagues, sir.

Overall, your build needs more active scouting around the 9-10 minute mark. If they opened Spire and you didn't know, you simply die in this circumstance, and Mutas are really strong/popular on Whirlwind. I don't really understand your composition over. Void Ray + Immortal is redundant in the sense that both kill Roaches and both lose to Muta.

You needed a much quicker 4th base. 17-minute 4th is a reasonable time. Since it was so late, you were down to 1 mining base for a while.

You started falling asleep on the Tempest production. You could have had many more out earlier and could have started pushing his position much earlier.

Alright, this is a 1 hour and 48 minute game, so I am not going to watch the entire thing. I think you just played too passively for a majority of the game and you expanded too late to your 4th and 5th bases. Start pushing the spines and spores once you have about 6 Tempests and make him spend his money. You will only get backed into a corner over time if you don't start demanding position on the map.
"That Zerg was fairly bad", and he is much better than you. Stopped reading right there.
Whatever, wallow in your ignorance.

Seriously, Razgriz? That's how you want to play it?
Play what? If I was going to play something, It'd be Starcraft. Not playing something here. Although I did play Dark Souls all day... Hmmm.

Anyway, your post towards Magnet are seriously jack off material for him. It's frankly annoying how ready you are to get on your knees for him.
Razgriz, who are some Master players whom you can reliably beat?
Play what? If I was going to play something, It'd be Starcraft. Not playing something here. Although I did play Dark Souls all day... Hmmm.

I've heard Dark Souls is good, haven't tried it.

Anyway, your post towards Magnet are seriously jack off material for him. It's frankly annoying how ready you are to get on your knees for him.

No, it's my perspective on diplomacy: find commonality, then express my perspective on what to change. I respect having High Master level players around sharing builds and offering advice, though.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum