EPTOn October 19 2009 17:48 ArvickHero wrote:
fast third = dead protoss in most cases
fast third = dead protoss in most cases
+1
ZvP is imbalanced - Page 30
| Forum Index > BW General |
|
RaptorX
Germany646 Posts
+1 | ||
|
Foucault
Sweden2826 Posts
My issues with the matchups are these: ZvP: Tech switches, i.e. mutas that take protoss by surprise and rape their main. "Power overwhelming", the mass of units that zerg can continually make and throw at protoss. The micro needed is much bigger for protoss, while their units are also more fragile. Drops...zerg drops are just ridiculous sometimes. Cracklings kill stuff in a matter of seconds, and there's not really that much protoss can do to protect against it. The fact that corsairs can't attack ground is also a huge disadvantage compared to mutas. Zerg units are just too cheap and good against protoss. I watched the game between Stork and Hyuk, a game Stork should have the upper hand in by far if you compare these players general skill. However Hyuk took him down quite easily, due to the nature of ZvP. Would he have been a mediocre Terran, Stork would've had the game in the bag. Protoss needs to use reavers more all the time imo. They are kind of streaky though and the scarabs live a life of their own but I still think that reavers can turn around ZvP. Then again I feel that this matchup is too imbalanced in general so I dunno what to do about it. PvT: How easily terran can screw up, and if their army is mispositioned in the slightest way, they can get utterly destroyed by a 1a2a3a protoss army. Protoss units in general are very strong against terran. Terran needs to micro alot; place mines, siege/unsiege, get in good position, pray for mines to blow up stuff good. Protoss pretty much just needs to flank and go in. And while a good sized terran army can get scary, arbiters totally rape this matchup. These units are way too good imo; you have stasis, that can immobilize so many tanks with just one spell. Now, if you have 2-3 arbiters, goodbye tanks. And terran needs to have a couple of sci vessels out there and be proactive in EMP:ing arbiters, and EMP is a slow spell etc. It's not that easy in the actual game setting. So ok, only stasis I guess could work. However, they also make units invisible, and have no time for their invisibility like wraiths do. I think it should be energy based. And finally the terran killer recall that is just too good of a spell, considering how easy it is to pull off. You just fly in and recall a bunch of units into terrans undefended main while he is out trying to position his army. It's ridiculous, I dunno how many PvT's I've seen where protoss doesn't really do anything in the game but defending and terrans is trying to push into his natural and then he recalls in terran main and GG. Wtf? Also, a couple of turrets and mines doesn't defend at all against recall most of the times, so it's really hard to anything useful against. Protoss also get arbiters so early nowadays which makes it even harder for T. I think recall should be limited to a much smaller amount of units, cloaking should have a timer and stasis should also affect a smaller group of units. With these fixes the matchup would be more even. | ||
|
infinity2k9
United Kingdom2397 Posts
On October 19 2009 11:55 ArvickHero wrote: Take note that of the current map pool its Match Point that has the most balanced PvZ, due to the third being taken is a mineral expo instead of a gas expo. Zergs have learned to abuse the easy third gas with an excellent BO and good simcities, with the easy third giving them enough excess gas to trade a group of mutas for several high templars while still having a huge hydra/lurker/ling army that just rolls over the Protoss army. True, i agree that does make it easier for toss. But from the games i've seen even ones which had a distant 3rd/4th Zerg can still manage to play very defensive and win from 4gas, such as Zero vs Stats on Moon Glaive and i remember another one, Jaedong vs somebody on Byzantium 3 i think last season. But yeah i bet it would help at least. As people have said its these modern simcities really making a difference that seemingly can't be broken without the P losing most of their ball. And Avidkeystamper i agree about the mutas, its funny these days how even archons are rarely enough to help. Also i agree with the premise maybe reavers would help more to help stop these mass hydra pushes, and for some harass. Just the scourge really being the problem for that.. it was really nice seeing Backho almost come back against Calm using them, shame it didn't work. Good to see some better discussion over the last page than some ridiculous arguing about made up classes  | ||
Hot_Bid
Braavos36375 Posts
Here's a game with a close third gas where Much used 2-4 reavers to "push" the zerg lurker defense instead of just attacking it head on. | ||
|
WhuazGoodJaggah
Lesotho777 Posts
I think recall should be limited to a much smaller amount of units, cloaking should have a timer and stasis should also affect a smaller group of units. With these fixes the matchup would be more even. then every TvP would be the T turtling in his base until 200/200. | ||
|
Noah
Norway164 Posts
| ||
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On October 19 2009 19:19 Foucault wrote: Yeah I hope SC2 is more balanced in alot of aspects. It will be refreshing to have a new game because I have found myself more and more bored of Starcraft the last couple of months. Too many games, and the old imbalances rear their ugly heads. ZvP, PvT especially. I've followed SC for 8 years now and have probably watched 10 k replays or whatever. Your list of suggestions is well-intentioned, but IMO, any change to the actual mechanics is too much. Just look at some of the new PL maps. Minute changes to a map can alter the "old imbalanced". How much difference do you think an actual change to the mechanics would make? The effects would be far greater than you would ever want. | ||
|
I_are_n00b
196 Posts
| ||
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
| ||
|
selboN
United States2523 Posts
| ||
|
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
| ||
|
RoieTRS
United States2569 Posts
On October 20 2009 08:13 zulu_nation8 wrote: its a waste if you actually build the pylon and not cancel it, its a waste for anything but vs 12 hatch. isnt that given? | ||
|
ArvickHero
10387 Posts
On October 20 2009 07:55 I_are_n00b wrote: What if all protosses rushed to pylon the zerg's nat and that became the standard? This way you limit the zerg's openings to 9pool, overpool and in-hatch. The number of scenarios to deal with shrinks, it's 100 min but you will probably save your probe scout as a result. It's a waste because it really doesn't make a difference if you pylon'd his nat in any game. Either he 9 pools and you've wasted 25 minerals (supposing you canceled) or he just expands to his third, which you really can't capitalize on if you've Forge FE'd. The only thing you get out of it is a delayed expansion for the Zerg, which really isn't enough to help balance the MU in any way. Another suggestion for balancing PvZ is increasing mineral count in bases/natural, but keeping the easy third gas. 1 more mineral patch could do wonders for Protoss, maybe it'll be enough to balance the matchup | ||
|
BanZu
United States3329 Posts
On October 20 2009 08:50 ArvickHero wrote: Another suggestion for balancing PvZ is increasing mineral count in bases/natural, but keeping the easy third gas. 1 more mineral patch could do wonders for Protoss, maybe it'll be enough to balance the matchup Could you elaborate on this? I'm a noob :[ | ||
|
Jayme
United States5866 Posts
On October 20 2009 08:12 selboN wrote: No it's not. Doing it every game out of sheer habit is a waste. But if the zerg late pools, pylon that nat, follow the drone to third. Don't let them put down a hatchery, it is not a waste. You just don't like it because you're zerg. ^_^ Uh I play PvZ and ZvP and i'm telling you straight up that manner pylon on a zerg is an absolute waste. There is no practical reason to even entertain the notion of doing it. | ||
|
ArvickHero
10387 Posts
I might be wrong, but back when the Protosses were raping Zergs, Kim Carry attributed this to the recent map trend of a high mineral count and started advocating for lower mineral counts in maps to "balance ZvP". I'm pretty sure this was before everything that destroys Protoss now, abusing easy third gas+simcity+muta sniping was discovered. Also, Stork stated in an interview it was really hard to play on Tears of the Protoss mostly because of the low mineral count, along with the double natural entrance which made Forge FE unviable. It seems like mineral count really affects the PvZ MU the most. Take Longinus as an example, it's considered a Protoss favored map against Zerg, and it also has 10 mineral patches in the main (I don't really know the map myself, so probably there are other things that make it a P map). | ||
|
Signet
United States1718 Posts
On October 18 2009 12:05 ghrur wrote: Anyway, the question is what has fantasy accomplished that sets him a class above calm? What has he accomplished that allows him to be S-Class but doesn't allow calm to be as well? This is a good point. To me it says more about fantasy.. I don't want to make a concrete "rule" for an arbitrary distinction, but it's reasonable to say someone isn't really S-class if they haven't won a Starleague. Maybe it indicates that, even though they have great ability, and are on par with S-class players in proleague, they don't have the top level of mental strength to win a starleague finals. fantasy's finals losses came as drawing even from 0-2 to force a 5th set vs Stork, only to not be able to complete the comeback. Then taking 2-0 lead against Jaedong and not being able to finish the set in 3 chances. | ||
|
selboN
United States2523 Posts
On October 20 2009 09:01 Jayme wrote: Uh I play PvZ and ZvP and i'm telling you straight up that manner pylon on a zerg is an absolute waste. There is no practical reason to even entertain the notion of doing it. Are you by any chance bad? I'm not saying do it every time. I'm saying do it when the opportunity presents itself. | ||
|
Zato-1
Chile4253 Posts
On October 20 2009 09:21 selboN wrote: Are you by any chance bad? I'm not saying do it every time. I'm saying do it when the opportunity presents itself. Yeah, you show 'em! Manner pylons are great in PvZ. I mean, in order to render them completely useless, Zerg would need a cheap, low-tech unit capable of taking down pylons really fast, while simultaneously by its very existence be a threat to the Protoss bases, forcing them to spend minerals on defenses. Additionally, this unit's name would have to start with 'zerg' and rhyme with 'ling'. Now where on earth would Zergs get that kind of unit? | ||
|
m3rciless
United States1476 Posts
On October 20 2009 09:51 Zato-1 wrote: Yeah, you show 'em! Manner pylons are great in PvZ. I mean, in order to render them completely useless, Zerg would need a cheap, low-tech unit capable of taking down pylons really fast, while simultaneously by its very existence be a threat to the Protoss bases, forcing them to spend minerals on defenses. Additionally, this unit's name would have to start with 'zerg' and rhyme with 'ling'. Now where on earth would Zergs get that kind of unit? BIIIIG misunderstanding. Hes talking about delaying the zergs nat with a pylon if they 12 hatch, you're talking about manner pylons like in PvP. | ||
| ||
