|
On June 08 2010 09:07 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2010 09:03 Saechiis wrote:
*sigh* Some people won't be happy till siege tanks can be overtaken by a zergling. Unfortunately Blizzard's numbers suggest the oppposite , since ZvT is pretty much 55% across the board in favor of Zerg. But ofcourse you will counter that by saying Blizzard is a money-snatching company that hates anything Zerg. In fact, they've probably received Terran money to makes roaches 2 supply. *those bastards*
I would like someone to do a Poll on what race TL members play, wouldn't be surprised to see a majority of Zerg. And after that we'll calculate the "whine-percentage" of each race, I'm guessing it's imba. Blizzard has never said that ZvT is 55%. You're pulling that out of your ass. Not only that, statistics don't = balance.
Absolutely,
Before siege tanks splash was improved and made smarter and roaches were nerfed. That was the time were T mech was still unpopular and everyones going MMM
IMO zerg wouldn't be the weakest if it wasn't for their late game problems. Ultralisks are still not being used (?) and broodlords just don't quite cut it anymore..
However i do think ultralisks(zerg melee build) are pretty viable now its just not gaining popularity yet.
|
On June 08 2010 11:56 xenocide.psv wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2010 11:43 ilbh wrote:mutas/lings/banelings mutas/roaches both compositions can be mixed with infestors roaches/hydras are awful against terrans unless you outmacro your opponent having a huge hydra roach army... cause tanks can melt hydras and roaches and Tier 3 is not a joke. its really good but like you said, its soo expensive and you need a lot of time to make hive/greater spire/corruptors/broodlords dont be so pessimist about zergs  btw, you forgot dimaga and all the korean zergs. the world cup was decided between 2 zergs... cool vs dimaga. Muta's are very weak when you consider their cost, and are probably best used against Toss I will agree. But using Banelings really cuts into your gas which makes getting Muta's even harder. I do agree that Roaches and Hydra's are awful against Terran, but there isn't any really effective options against Terran players when Terran Mech is as powerful as it is. Vikings will destroy Muta's and everyone knows Thor's will massacre them, then Roachs get stomped by Marauders\Tanks. I guess Lings\Banelings are worth a shot but it still is NOT easy bu any stretch of the imagination. I'm going to continue playing Zerg because I love the mechanics of the race and the units, but there are a lot of areas that needs improvement ;p I can't believe I forgot Dimaga =x As for the Korean Zerg they are a mystery to me. I keep hearing Korean Players are very good with Zerg but whenever I go Replay hunting I see dozens of TvP\PvT replays and all the Zerg ones have the Zerg player losing.
I use sen's build with muta/ling/banelings against terran.
I will always have the same number of mutas than vikings and mass lings with few banelings.
as for replays, I think there is only a few of the good korean zergs
|
On June 08 2010 11:56 Lithose wrote:Show nested quote +
Anyway, the point is: There needs to be a 1-food unit for Zerg, or a 1.5 supply Roach at the very least to tank the firepower of P and T early and late game mech/6-gate all-ins. It's kind of silly how the macro advantage has shifted from BW. A 2-base, saturated toss can easily keep up with a 3-base Zerg. It's just silly. And the entirety of the map pool doesn't support a 4+ base Zerg unless there's some surreal contain. And 4-basing just isn't a consistent -15 minute play given the viability of 2-base T and P play.
I'm pretty sure base per base, T and P are supposed to have the advantage, which is why hatcheries are cheaper for Zerg? The zerg design philosophy is based on macro/expansion. Their tools allow for faster growth than the other two races, both in army and expansion numbers. (Tools like, cheaper hatcheries, multiple drone production, creep allowing for more mobile defense forces, limited need for production buildings due to production being consolidated into hatcheries ect.) Zerg is still definitely the strongest macro race. I think the problem is more about whether that advantage is sufficient to combat certain builds, not whether or not its there.
I think the cheaper hatcheries is a misconception. Not only do hatcheries cost 300 minerals, they also cost a drone and an overlord of supply ~ 450 minerals. Zerg can drone up faster than other races, but dones don't mine less efficiently than scvs, and only slightly less than probes.
The main reason that zergs in pro games try to take more bases, imho, is that zergs have that early game aggression bonus of 6 lings in case of trouble. In addition, zerg armies tend to be less cost effective than terrans ones so pro zergs take more bases, but less workers per base, so it doesn't boil down to a war of attrition where the zerg loses. Now in starcraft 2, I can't really say anything about cost effectiveness.
|
hatcheries arent really cheaper since it costs a 50 mineral drone + its future mining time as well
nexuses are the cheapest, since it gets its macro mechanic for free while queens and orbitals cost another 150 minerals
True, still, zerg definetly has the most "expanse" oriented mechanics. The consolidation of production in mid-late game is a huge macro advantage, so is 30% speed bonus on creep. Its pretty obvious that Blizzard designed zerg to be the easiest to expand with (And has the largest rewards for expansion.)
Maybe that is just me though, not saying I'm super insightful but it just seemed like it to me.
|
I think the cheaper hatcheries is a misconception. Not only do hatcheries cost 300 minerals, they also cost a drone and an overlord of supply ~ 450 minerals. Zerg can drone up faster than other races, but dones don't mine less efficiently than scvs, and only slightly less than probes.
The main reason that zergs in pro games try to take more bases, imho, is that zergs have that early game aggression bonus of 6 lings in case of trouble. In addition, zerg armies tend to be less cost effective than terrans ones so pro zergs take more bases, but less workers per base, so it doesn't boil down to a war of attrition where the zerg loses. Now in starcraft 2, I can't really say anything about cost effectiveness.
The reason Zerg takes more bases is because their production is tied directly to the number of bases, since their CC is also their main production building. No other race works like that, for every other race, there is only an economic link to production (More money, more structures, more production.)...For the zerg, there is a direct link...More bases, more production. The zerg mechanics, like creep expansion/movement bonuses, all point to aggressive expansion.
This is why I say zerg definitely have a macro advantage...I can't say if its enough of one to balance the game but it is there. (Just clarifying the last part, because I don't want people to think the word "advantage"=OP...It doesn't )
|
I don't get it. A couple of weeks ago when a lot of tournaments were happening and zerg dominated in most of them, people were saying zerg was imba and now all of a sudden they are the weakest? Is it just a coincidence that zerg players have been as successful as they have been?
|
how can races be imbalanced at all? the Author of this poll really has no idea what hes talking about.
there might be matchups that favor one side on certain maps and certain spawning locations. everything else is too generalized.
ppl who are actually voting here have no idea about balance (wether theyre skilled or not)
|
On June 08 2010 13:02 clickrush wrote:
how can races be imbalanced at all? the Author of this poll really has no idea what hes talking about.
there might be matchups that favor one side on certain maps and certain spawning locations. everything else is too generalized.
ppl who are actually voting here have no idea about balance (wether theyre skilled or not)
I'm willing to bet that you're a terran player. Q_Q
Seriously, the game is not perfectly balanced, and the polls are pretty much dead on.
|
On June 08 2010 13:00 nam nam wrote:
I don't get it. A couple of weeks ago when a lot of tournaments were happening and zerg dominated in most of them, people were saying zerg was imba and now all of a sudden they are the weakest? Is it just a coincidence that zerg players have been as successful as they have been?
yes, actually. which is the funny thing
for the same reason everyone said mech was useless at the start of beta. Then, after one small change, it's overpowered. (hint: it was always really good). Players aren't a gram stain of race balance. Really. Especially this early on. You have to look at the overall capability of T/P/Z.
|
On June 08 2010 13:00 nam nam wrote:
I don't get it. A couple of weeks ago when a lot of tournaments were happening and zerg dominated in most of them, people were saying zerg was imba and now all of a sudden they are the weakest? Is it just a coincidence that zerg players have been as successful as they have been?
I think you missed out on the patch that made roaches 2 supply...
|
On June 08 2010 13:11 synapse wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2010 13:00 nam nam wrote:
I don't get it. A couple of weeks ago when a lot of tournaments were happening and zerg dominated in most of them, people were saying zerg was imba and now all of a sudden they are the weakest? Is it just a coincidence that zerg players have been as successful as they have been? I think you missed out on the patch that made roaches 2 supply...
Haha, seriously.
Seems like a lot of people are missing that.
|
On June 08 2010 13:05 TLOBrian wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2010 13:02 clickrush wrote:
how can races be imbalanced at all? the Author of this poll really has no idea what hes talking about.
there might be matchups that favor one side on certain maps and certain spawning locations. everything else is too generalized.
ppl who are actually voting here have no idea about balance (wether theyre skilled or not) I'm willing to bet that you're a terran player. Q_Q Seriously, the game is not perfectly balanced, and the polls are pretty much dead on.
Ironic, because I'm willing to bet that you're a Zerg player. Q_Q
Seriously, there hasn't been any time to claim racial imbalances with all the patches flying around. There's just biased people and polls claiming their race is weakest and the stuff they lose to the most is OP.
|
Tournament results argue Terran is the worst.
|
Which tournaments happened in patch 14?
|
On June 08 2010 13:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2010 13:00 nam nam wrote:
I don't get it. A couple of weeks ago when a lot of tournaments were happening and zerg dominated in most of them, people were saying zerg was imba and now all of a sudden they are the weakest? Is it just a coincidence that zerg players have been as successful as they have been? yes, actually. which is the funny thing for the same reason everyone said mech was useless at the start of beta. Then, after one small change, it's overpowered. (hint: it was always really good). Players aren't a gram stain of race balance. Really. Especially this early on. You have to look at the overall capability of T/P/Z.
Sorry but mech was not nearly as good early on as it is now.
The splash damage "bug" made tanks very unreliable, especially in smaller numbers. In addition, the Thor was buffed a lot which makes defending against Mutalisks a bit easier off of Factories. They also fixed Hellion splash so that it was consistent (it had a range bug where you could only trigger maximum splash range with really good micro). A lot of little things all added together is what made mech really viable. If you won't believe me, ask FrozenArbiter (Jinro).
|
The fact that the data is quite spread over all 3 races in both polls, to me shows that no race is really over powered.
i do play terran though, so maybe im biased.
|
I voted zerg strongest and protoss weakest, but I think it is by a very small margin.
I believe the majority of people voting zerg weakest are doing so because they fail to abuse all the insane lategame tactics zerg has available to them and in doing so assume that their race must clearly be weakest. Show me someone who utilizes nydus worms to link spread out expansions and uses broodlords whenever they have the opportunity and STILL thinks that zerg is the weakest, and i'll eat my words . And yes, TvZ is my best matchup, but I still believe that zerg has so much untapped potential.
Terran are probably the easiest to abuse and as such recieve a disproportionate amount of the strongest votes.
I think that Protoss is completely capable of beating any race but since they are so limited in their tech choices (that are actually viable) i voted them weakest.
|
On June 08 2010 13:33 kryto wrote:I voted zerg strongest and protoss weakest, but I think it is by a very small margin. I believe the majority of people voting zerg weakest are doing so because they fail to abuse all the insane lategame tactics zerg has available to them and in doing so assume that their race must clearly be weakest. Show me someone who utilizes nydus worms to link spread out expansions and uses broodlords whenever they have the opportunity and STILL thinks that zerg is the weakest, and i'll eat my words . And yes, TvZ is my best matchup, but I still believe that zerg has so much untapped potential. Terran are probably the easiest to abuse and as such recieve a disproportionate amount of the strongest votes. I think that Protoss is completely capable of beating any race but since they are so limited in their tech choices (that are actually viable) i voted them weakest.
hahaahahahahahahahahhhaahhaahahahahahahaahahhaahahahahHHAAHAHHAHAHAHH
|
I voted zerg strongest and protoss weakest, but I think it is by a very small margin.
I believe the majority of people voting zerg weakest are doing so because they fail to abuse all the insane lategame tactics zerg has available to them and in doing so assume that their race must clearly be weakest. Show me someone who utilizes nydus worms to link spread out expansions and uses broodlords whenever they have the opportunity and STILL thinks that zerg is the weakest, and i'll eat my words . And yes, TvZ is my best matchup, but I still believe that zerg has so much untapped potential.
Terran are probably the easiest to abuse and as such recieve a disproportionate amount of the strongest votes.
I think that Protoss is completely capable of beating any race but since they are so limited in their tech choices (that are actually viable) i voted them weakest.
You are joking right?
EDIT: The one thing that i see as indicator for the terran throne right now is:
I see Protoss players crying about their matchups, i see Zerg players crying about their race and matchups and see terrans.....saying...nahhh we aren't THAT overpowered.
|
On June 08 2010 13:43 RogerChillingworth wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2010 13:33 kryto wrote:I voted zerg strongest and protoss weakest, but I think it is by a very small margin. I believe the majority of people voting zerg weakest are doing so because they fail to abuse all the insane lategame tactics zerg has available to them and in doing so assume that their race must clearly be weakest. Show me someone who utilizes nydus worms to link spread out expansions and uses broodlords whenever they have the opportunity and STILL thinks that zerg is the weakest, and i'll eat my words . And yes, TvZ is my best matchup, but I still believe that zerg has so much untapped potential. Terran are probably the easiest to abuse and as such recieve a disproportionate amount of the strongest votes. I think that Protoss is completely capable of beating any race but since they are so limited in their tech choices (that are actually viable) i voted them weakest. hahaahahahahahahahahhhaahhaahahahahahahaahahhaahahahahHHAAHAHHAHAHAHH
Laughing at someone who actually tries to reason and support his opinion is the saddest thing of all. Especially considering your lack of any reasoning-capability whatsoever. I hope you get banhammered and I'm not usually that guy.
Same goes for the guy beneath you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
