|
I already was telling people as the patch came out how ZvT would end up, and it's finally there.
Every high level TvZ is an aggro all-in, or gimmick in order to not go late game versus Zerg (back to early beta status).
Do not expect it to change. And do not expect Terrans to win even with this stuff. It's not just a trend - it was inevitable. After all of these nerfs to Terran, not addressing Zerg's late game macro, which always has been invincible...
Except in the era of tvz mech. That's when Zergs whined because they were mad Terran could actually play a late game management game and not automatically lose. Although, just as an aside, mech was imba back then. Anyways
Terrans basically already exhausted all of the options for attempting macro management play...to no avail. A management game versus Zerg in lategame is never an equal game.
Foxer made marines popular TvZ, sure, but what he really made popular (if you want to call it a "trend" or "metagame shift") is the mass early marines to make it so you don't have to go late game versus Zerg.
People say I whine and am "arrogant" in my balance analysis...but I'm pretty sure the people that haven't hopped on board the ZvT ANALYSIS wagon are the ones being arrogant now.
How can people looking at balance or GSL games honestly look at the games and assess that "pros can't macro lategame with Terran," or "Terran players are bad," or "this is all gimmicky stuff."
To all of those people I say - get over yourselves. You can pretend Zerg is as underpowered as you want or that mules are too good (LOL). But look at the fucking games.
Every Terran, even goddamn intotherainbow, is doing marine/scv all-in variations. These players are not stupid. They understand the state of the game.
So please, especially general forum SC2 posters, stop acting like the progamers don't know what they're doing, or, in the more funny posts, acting like Terran's are abusing some mystical strategy that is uber good!
It's not. At all. All of these scv/marine all-ins are to completely avoid lategame.
Expect more of them. ALOT MORE.
Good day!
and yes, I know I take a lot of flak for being outspoken on the boards about this stuff. That's fine. Bring it. But I wonder if people can manage to attack my arguments instead of me personally.
If you honestly feel Terran can compete with Zerg in a late game macro management game, I would be happy to see your arguments. I'm sure you'll have plenty of GSL games to back those up as well (LOL).
One more note to readers - if it seems like I've repeated myself over the course of the last 3 weeks or so...guess what? It's because everything I said back then applied, but the game was still developing up to this point, so people were quick to bash me instead of looking at the game and analyzing it more objectively.
edit: 11/29/2010:
I still think the match-up is in the same state, but currently what's really killing this match-up, along with most GSL games...I think most people will agree is...
The maps are also raping players left and right. What the hell was GSL thinking?
edit: 12/6/2010:
GSL RO8 Nestea VS TSL-Rain...more Terran all-ins...more 10-13 min+ Z macro wins...
Do you really want chat rooms? Do you really want balanced TvZ/ZvT?
  
|
|
|
You know you can write as much as you want but people who doubt you arent gonna be convinced unless you switch your race to zerg and crush some top terrans in straight up macro games. Thats just the way it is, people need hard proof, they cant just trust someones words, and definitely not someone who seems so absurdly biased.
|
I'm not a top notch player so maybe I shouldn't speak, but from what I experience throughout my nooby game, is that if I don't end the game early with some marine rush or some crazy/lucky helion harass, zerg gets 3 + bases and I have to turtle and everything goes downhill from there.
Let's say i push with a decent force of marines and tanks, encounter his army while i'm marching WIN the fight, by the time I get to his base, the zerg has already a given birth to a bunch of stuff that faceroll my weakened army. If I wait for reinforcement, he gets even more time to get more stuff... yeah my ZvT needs some help.
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On November 24 2010 04:10 TheAntZ wrote:
You know you can write as much as you want but people who doubt you arent gonna be convinced unless you switch your race to zerg and crush some top terrans in straight up macro games. Thats just the way it is, people need hard proof, they cant just trust someones words, and definitely not someone who seems so absurdly biased.
Every top Terran I've talked to shares the same opinion.
|
Calgary25998 Posts
|
On November 24 2010 04:10 TheAntZ wrote:
You know you can write as much as you want but people who doubt you arent gonna be convinced unless you switch your race to zerg and crush some top terrans in straight up macro games. Thats just the way it is, people need hard proof, they cant just trust someones words, and definitely not someone who seems so absurdly biased.
That is wrong, actually, well chosen words are enough for most people. THey just need to hear what they want. But this isn't the issue.
I agree. Terrans all in versus zerg because late game it is unmanagable with our current knowledge. Maybe mech is the answer?
|
On November 24 2010 04:10 TheAntZ wrote:
You know you can write as much as you want but people who doubt you arent gonna be convinced unless you switch your race to zerg and crush some top terrans in straight up macro games. Thats just the way it is, people need hard proof, they cant just trust someones words, and definitely not someone who seems so absurdly biased.
You remember the mass nydus network chains back in beta? That was me. I played Zerg entirely for the entire last month or so of beta.
People have short attention spans, so yes, the 20 post noobs will assemble and see I have a Terran icon and nitpick.
If you want hard proof, look at the trend of GSL games. Look at fruitdealer's win, not for the "OMG A ZERG WON 'IMBA' " but look at how he was playing in a patch that was clearly Terran favored. intotherainbow did play like trash in the finals, but how fruitdealer played was THE way to theoretically play Zerg the best - go to late game -> win.
Now, if you want more hard proof, look at post patch, GSL2. More and more Zergs were winning against Terran, and if you want to analyze the games that Terran did in fact win versus Zergs, it was with very, very gimmicky stuff. Out of all those games, only a few go to late game, and most of them that do Zerg of course won.
Now fast forward to present. TvZ GSL3. Mass scv/marine all-in variations on the korean server. So far in GSL3, I think I'm pretty in the clear to say that the TvZ games won by Terran have been before the 10 minute mark, or won outright with marine/scvs, or banshee play. I don't think there's been any equal footing macro games seen, unless you count the mass viking game, which was more of a "1 time strat" thing to catch someone off guard. (or maybe mass viking will develop...doubtful though. It's just another gimmick meant to take a win without a macro game).
So...yes, there's a lot of hard proof besides my own interjected opinion.
as always you're very astute. Just edited in your quote. Yes, it's more of the same as I mentioned above...because nothing has changed since the patch has released. It's just pros and others have reached the point where they realize a management game is not possible versus Zerg.
slayers boxer analyzed the same weeks back, and despite not being the "omg bonjwa" of SC2...he knows his shit when he's talking about balance.
|
avilo u can't play TvZ like u play TvT sorry to disappoint.
LOL 
|
Even before the most recent tank nerf, I've had problems against zergs who get away with 14 hatch and don't take econ damage (edit: extreme econ damage) from my attempted hellion/banshee/reaper (depending on the game) harass. It just seems that every time my army moves out it gets decimated as soon as it moves into creep territory, even if I open very economically and produce the right units. This happens most frequently to me on larger maps that have less territory to leverage, such as metalopolis or shakuras plateau.
|
why are you insisting that you called it and spouting that you were the mass nydus guy? I agree with ur opinion but your tone and attitude are worthless. fine, you called it. but so did everyone else who had a basic knowledge of how patches would affect the game.
|
Maybe no one is good enough to beat Zerg late game yet :U
In any case, what you're saying makes sense, so. -shrug-
Although, in a personal opinion, I don't think the game is imbalanced. I think it's just been adjusted, and people need to find a new way to beat what's been added and work with what's been nerfed. ;o
Doesn't have much to do with this thread, but I wanted to share. ~_~''
|
Judging off some of Blizzard's past balance adjustments, I wouldn't be surprised if they did something stupid like making hatcheries require a spawning pool to make. >_>
|
On November 24 2010 04:30 mOnion wrote:
why are you insisting that you called it and spouting that you were the mass nydus guy? I agree with ur opinion but your tone and attitude are worthless. fine, you called it. but so did everyone else who had a basic knowledge of how patches would affect the game.
A) I was responding to theantz about being t/z zerg biased
B) Just speaking my mind. Not gonna sit here and pretend all is hunky dory in TvZ land.
C) the majority of people still to this day have the idea that you can play a macro game versus Zerg in TvZ. Read the forums if you don't believe me.
D) Yes I did call it  that's not the damn point though. Do people really like that a management/macro game versus Zerg is an inevitable loss for T? It's literally like playing against a clock. Or maybe everyone likes watching T's all-in vs Z every game to even have a chance to win games.
On November 24 2010 04:22 LuckyFool wrote:avilo u can't play TvZ like u play TvT sorry to disappoint. LOL
lmao i know  i wish a macro game were possible lol. I'm sure all the GSL Terrans do too.
On November 24 2010 04:36 Bibbit wrote:
Judging off some of Blizzard's past balance adjustments, I wouldn't be surprised if they did something stupid like making hatcheries require a spawning pool to make. >_>
yah...pretty scary actually
|
They cant make hatcheries require a spawning pool since
1. This would prevent people from rebuilding in team games.
2. It just seems funny that a spawning pool requires a Hatchery and a Hatchery requires a spawning pool =)
|
As much as I don't like SC2, I don't think you're a genius for pointing out that the balance of a game would be tumultuous in the first year of its release. I also think it was a mistake, from an enjoyability perspective, to have big tournaments so soon for a game that was obviously going to suffer through things like this.
In SC:BW revolutions come from changes in the maps, and from players going really deep into the game and figuring things out (these mutually affect each other). There is lasting significance to these changes, and players who use other races just have to evolve with it.
In SC2, right now, every time there is a perceived imbalance, Blizzard has to go in and fix it by changing critical values which mess with the whole game. It turns the GSL into a circus.
Achieving perfect balance in a game in a nearly impossible feat. Everyone calls SC:BW a fluke. How many patches will Blizzard release until they say 'close enough?' I don't know. But the game needs stability before players will have the motivation to really dig deep into themselves to find solutions for their race, instead of blaming the game.
I think there's lots of things Terran could do. I think Terran and Protoss are not playing intelligent economic games yet. But until the game is stable, all-ins are an easier way to deal with perceived unfairness.
Imagine if instead of players perfecting Protoss FE vs Zerg in BW, Blizzard had just given zealots shorter build time or something. The game would never be worth figuring out.
|
358 Posts
Granted all I do is watch the games and am new at even that, but I have to say that your posts are always very enlightening, Avilo. They're analytical and insightful. And even when people attack you for what they deem "whining" you back yourself with concrete proof.
Guess they don't call you Avilostradamus for nuttin. hehe
|
|
|
On November 24 2010 04:45 Oconomist wrote:
They cant make hatcheries require a spawning pool since
1. This would prevent people from rebuilding in team games.
2. It just seems funny that a spawning pool requires a Hatchery and a Hatchery requires a spawning pool =)
Good point. :O
Not that it would stop Blizzard though
|
Its the same way in PvZ, P has to do some sort of dedicated pressure early on or they risk getting ran over because gateway units scale so poorly in large numbers vs Z. I think its just the way the game is right now, if Z is not being aggressively harassed in some way Z is winning. Every successful PvZ at MLG was just gateway pressure for the longest time possible, any tech to colossi or HTs was just to deal with the inevitable hydras or mass roaches. At the very least being super aggressive with gateway units can deny mutalisk transitions .
I'm not gonna say anyone is OP, i think this really is just the way TvZ and PvZ will be played right now because of how strong Z is when Z is allowed to play economic games.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
