|
Well, he explains why he voted Zerg as strongest (most Zerg late-game trickery remains un(der)used). Whether you find it hilarious or not, he supported his opinion ... that's leagues ahead of: "OMG MECH IMBA!" ... Why? ... "Idra and Artosis say so and my cookiecutter 1a build loses to it too!".
Just supporting an opinion does NOT make it right by any means. The things he explains and you so dearly try to defend are just wrong. Nydusworms aren't underused, in fact zerg players try so hard to win a broken matchup that they make more nydus Worms than ever. Broodlords are decent against bad mech play but that is not the real problem.
One could say Ultralisks are underused but that is because you are dead by the time you have a decent amount....or youll never get enough of them, or they just die and you decide to not get them again.
I for example feel like i could beat a lot of terran players with better execution of my play and a good baneling ling hydra push when he is on the move, or well timed Mutalisks....but that is not because the matchup is balanced, it is because the players i beat can't play mech right. I played a lot of Random and feel rather objective about this topic, (taking the fact aside that i switched to Zerg full time to rape the shit out of the spoiled brats that Terrans are atm.)
I am not capable of beating my own Terranplay and that is why the matchup is broken.
I play enough games and tested as many as i could to build my own opinion on it and as long as people only play the matchup from the terran side, they'll not get the problem and start defending their race. I would even dare say that only a handful of Zerg players is capable of seeing how broken this matchup is.
|
On June 08 2010 14:22 IdrA wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2010 14:14 monitor wrote:On June 08 2010 14:08 monitor wrote:
My troubles are ZvT. To me, I have to scout the Terran, while he knows I will get zerglings, roach/hydra, and fast expand. My builds are WAAAAY to confined as Zerg I feel like compared to Protoss and Terran, where creativity is at my fingertips.
All of this is just minor, for I like the game,
monitor
how does he know that you get this composition? and why would you make this against mech for example which counters it? and when you do this composition anyway then why do you have to scout the terran? 1) This is the only unit composition that Zerg can go. (banelings I suppose) 2) There is no counter for Terran mech, just plainly outplaying the Terran. As Roger said, Dark Swarm needs to be added back to SC2 BADLY. Something needs to be done for Zerg, any different ideas? monitor dunno why people want dark swarm back so badly it was a fucking awful spell that made for horrible games in sc1 and doesnt even really address the problem. swarm wasnt what made mech beatable, at all. swarm raped bio, cuz there you could focus on lurkers and lurker+swarm was invincible. vs mech you didnt want lurkers, and tank splash means that regular units under swarm still get raped. obviously it would help, but really it would mostly serve to make bio even worse vs zerg and wouldnt help vs mech all that much. stop asking for swarm.
This. I dunno about you guys but I almost never used dark swarm vs mech. It was only really good for delaying an expansion or something by putting a few lurkers under it (and we don't have lurkers anymore). Of course some games it worked pretty well (Jaedong vs Skyhigh comes to mind) but it generally wasn't really worth it. Once Terran gets a bunch of tanks dark swarm does shit.
|
Everyone is at least a little bit biased in favor of his/ her main race, that's not the issue as it should even out. The issue is unfounded opinions, so I'm glad you're stepping of that road.
Again, it was a joke. Like "haha". You know..iNcontroL style. It's O.K. Saechiis, most of the time jokes consist of these stereotypes. It doesn't mean they're true.
I was just teasing.
On a related note:
P
T
Z
O.K.
Edit:
Or whatever, I don't even care. Terran could be better. I'm just of the opinion that Zerg has overwhelmingly more difficulty dealing with P and T than P and T have dealing with Zerg or each other. And maybe that's how it's supposed to be. But with the food cost of Zerg units as well as the extraordinary 1 and 2-base play, the quickness of games, the ease of warp-in, the all-ins P and T are capable of, it just seems silly to hoist Zerg #1. That's all. And I think I have the "diamond level" experience to say such a thing.
But call me biased.
@Turbo:
You're missing my point, I don't care whether someone's opinion makes sense or not. I want them to be supported by some kind of reasoning. Shouting random stuff is easy, explaining why you're shouting is a lot harder (but much more useful when you're trying to get your view across).
|
It's just the fact that it [dark swarm] was a way of approaching these huge balls of death. Again, Brood War's a balanced game. Of course dark swarm isn't unreal amazing. That would sort of debunk BW's being balanced. Eh?
Sure, fungal growth is nice against balls of marines. It's nice if you get the right angle on medivacs making their retreat, or 3-4 vikings doing their do. Neural parasite is great, but the unit is just so fragile. But so was the defiler. The only difference is the defiler didn't need to park its ass up 5-9 range from the opposing army and channel a spell before it got target-fired.
I don't want to make the mistake of relating too much to Brood War, but there are comparisons that need to be made. The game is balanced for a reason. Not everything is equatable, or even comparable. But there are parallels to be drawn. I think it's fair to say that dark swarm helped Zerg a lot in a number of situations approaching T balls. And that's given a 1-food unit, better zerglings across the board, and faster ultras.
Helllllooo
|
So, Terran mech is highly imbalanced on small, constricted maps?
...
Well, duh.
|
On what map isn't it really strong? I'm not going to say imbalanced. That would be way too presumptuous.
But, really. LT? Kulas Ravine? Steppes? IZ? Blistering Sands?
You name it. It can work. It's not unbeatable, just a little too good against Zerg. Most Terrans agree. It's not really debatable, even.
|
i wonder how many golds and silvers are voting their race is nerfed cuz they don't understand Mu's
|
It's not really debatable, even.
And yet there's dozens of threads full of people disagreeing, how ignorant can you be.
|
And yet there's dozens of threads full of people disagreeing, how ignorant can you be.
They are paranoid in fear of nerfs. Or they feel subconciously ashamed of playing the stronger race... or well, some may just be as ignorant as you say ^^
|
|
|
how can zerg be the weakest...i just don't understand this at all.
|
They are paranoid in fear of nerfs. Or they feel subconciously ashamed of playing the stronger race... or well, some may just be as ignorant as you say ^^
Haha,
That's funny since Mech has already been nerfed ... and strangely enough I don't see any threads popping up complaining about it. In fact it's still threads of Zerg players complaining about the Roach supply nerf. ^^ Since it's obviously ridiculous that you can't make a 200/200 Roach army and 1a beat anything with it.
For those people I will put it into context:
Roach: A 75 Minerals , 25 gas armored unit with 145HP, 16 Attack and 27sec build time ... and it used to be 1 supply. Easily massed.
Let's compare it to the Terran counter, the Marauder:
A 100 mineral, 25 gas armored unit with 125HP, 10 Attack and 30 sec build time and 2 supply.
Wow, a counter that's 25 minerals more expensive, has 20 HP less, 6 Attack less, Takes 3 sec. longer to build and is double the supply cost ... only thing it has going for it is it's superior range/ slightly faster cooldown.
Roaches are still awesome, but most Zerg are too proud to still focus on them because their feelings are hurt *sniffles*
|
Haha,
That's funny since Mech has already been nerfed ... and strangely enough I don't see any threads popping up complaining about it. In fact it's still threads of Zerg players complaining about the Roach supply nerf. ^^ Since it's obviously ridiculous that you can't make a 200/200 Roach army and 1a beat anything with it.
The so called "nerf" to Siegetanks has not adressed the issues with TvZ in the slightest. Most Zerg units die in the same amount of hits, only thing changed is the splash damage. If you just mass Roaches you will lose, since they lost their teeth the moment they went to 2 supply which doesn't mean that we haven't tried to use them.
Besides that, your Theorycrafting is pretty much useless. Roaches were imbalanced but that was way earlier then before the 2 supply nerf and Marauders (pure or mixed with a bunch of marines) beat the crap out of roaches 1on1 no matter what you are trying to show with bouncin' some numbers there.
You can even beat mass Roaches with mass Marines...as long as you keep up with the zergs economy and upgrades and kill him before he gets burrow and regen (get Shieldupgrade asap!).
Roaches are still awesome, but most Zerg are too proud to still focus on them because their feelings are hurt *sniffles*
They aren't anymore... and if I hadn't read your poems about people posting with logic and sense I would call this a troll.
|
[B]
Roach: A 75 Minerals , 25 gas armored unit with 145HP, 16 Attack and 27sec build time ... and it used to be 1 supply. Easily massed.
Let's compare it to the Terran counter, the Marauder:
A 100 mineral, 25 gas armored unit with 125HP, 10 Attack and 30 sec build time and 2 supply.
Wow, a counter that's 25 minerals more expensive, has 20 HP less, 6 Attack less, Takes 3 sec. longer to build and is double the supply cost ... only thing it has going for it is it's superior range/ slightly faster cooldown.
This is the text book example of a terrible post.
You make it seem like Marauder have less DMG than roaches which is ridiculous, you just ignore the attack bonus they have against armor, not to mention that D/S wise marauders do even better, not to mention they are faster with stim then speed upgraded roaches, not to mention they have slow, which allows that 3-4 marauders if microed properly can kill off infinite ammount of roaches.
Arent you ashamed of making a post based on units stats and ignoring the part which actually demolishes your pitiful argument? It's like saying Thors are terrible defensive units against Mutas and coming up with the stats ignoring the +dmg vs Light of the Thor, and the fact that it s repairable.
Or this is a weak and not funny joke, which i do not get?
|
On June 08 2010 15:03 RogerChillingworth wrote:
On what map isn't it really strong? I'm not going to say imbalanced. That would be way too presumptuous.
But, really. LT? Kulas Ravine? Steppes? IZ? Blistering Sands?
You name it. It can work. It's not unbeatable, just a little too good against Zerg. Most Terrans agree. It's not really debatable, even.
The beta maps are all pretty small maps. I'd rather see it on, say, Fighting Spirit or Destination.
I do think MULES pose a serious lategame supply problem, however, and the fact that diminishing returns on mining don't really kick in until each base has 6 workers on gas and 2 per mineral patch makes it worse. In Broodwar, gas took half as many workers, and diminishing returns bit you hard after 1.5 workers/patch, which allowed a player on more bases to mine faster with the same number of workers. Now a non-Terran always has to devote more food to workers than Terran, which is ruinous if Terran can reach a more-efficient-than-yours 200/200 army.
|
I fully support the current results of the poll terran is the most powerfull, and will continue to have the revelations that happened with mech. Where terran finds a new build and rolls everything with it. The fact is terran is currently the hardest race to master, but blizzard is balancing around the fact people have it 75% figured out, vs the people who are sitting at 95% figured out on zerg or protoss (numbers out of my ass, but you get the picture.)
|
It was splash that did the major damage in the first place, and Blizzard has mentioned their Tank nerf was aimed at making TvT more varied ... it wasn't supposed to make much of a difference TvZ. Also good job pretending a reduction of 10 in damage isn't significant.
Waving away numbers isn't going to change the fact that Roaches are still very good. Marauders by no means "beat the crap out of Roaches" since 5 Roaches beat 4 Marauders in a straight up fight (and that's supposed to be a hard counter). Also, if the Zerg is macro'ing decently there is literally NO way Roaches lose to mass marine, a Roach can easily take on Marines in a 1:2 ratio.
And if my *sniffles* is a troll, this definately is:
They are paranoid in fear of nerfs. Or they feel subconciously ashamed of playing the stronger race... or well, some may just be as ignorant as you say ^^
|
On June 08 2010 15:26 Saechiis wrote:
Roach: A 75 Minerals , 25 gas armored unit with 145HP, 16 Attack and 27sec build time ... and it used to be 1 supply. Easily massed.
Let's compare it to the Terran counter, the Marauder:
A 100 mineral, 25 gas armored unit with 125HP, 10 Attack and 30 sec build time and 2 supply.
Wow, a counter that's 25 minerals more expensive, has 20 HP less, 6 Attack less, Takes 3 sec. longer to build and is double the supply cost ... only thing it has going for it is it's superior range/ slightly faster cooldown.
Roaches are still awesome, but most Zerg are too proud to still focus on them because their feelings are hurt *sniffles*
Compare fully upgraded Roachs to fully Upgraded Marauders with Stim, and the Marauders will more than likely decimate the Roachs. Concussive shot allows Marauders to just kite the Roachs in combination with their superior range. Marauders also have the same base movement speed as Roachs do upgraded, and a faster rate of fire even without stim pack.
Basically you have no idea why the Zerg players are actually upset about the change to Roachs. Roachs were definitely overpowered as 1 supply units, but increasing their supply cost without making any changes to them was a definite overnerf. If their cost was increased why not increase their range a little or make their base movement speed a little higher so they don't get kited by everything under the sun? I thought Zerg were supposed to be about Speed anyway, why does it feel like all my units are hobbling around the map on crutches chasing after Zealots and Stalkers or a bunch of Terrans abusing Crystal Meth?
|
Waving away numbers isn't going to change the fact that Roaches are still very good. Marauders by no means "beat the crap out of Roaches" since 5 Roaches beat 4 Marauders in a straight up fight (and that's supposed to be a hard counter).
I think this isn't true even without hit and run,stim, or both... which you are supposed to do with marauders.
Also, if the Zerg is macro'ing decently there is literally NO way Roaches lose to mass marine, a Roach can easily take on Marines in a 1:2 ratio. Which he can't when you push with 1base mass marines...
It was splash that did the major damage in the first place, and Blizzard has mentioned their Tank nerf was aimed at making TvT more varied ... it wasn't supposed to make much of a difference TvZ. Also good job pretending a reduction of 10 in damage isn't significant.
If they weren't aiming to fix TvZ with the patch this would make it even worse of a change because it's needed. And I'm not pretending...in TvZ it has nearly no impact on the matchup.
|
On June 08 2010 15:57 Geo.Rion wrote:Show nested quote +[B]
Roach: A 75 Minerals , 25 gas armored unit with 145HP, 16 Attack and 27sec build time ... and it used to be 1 supply. Easily massed.
Let's compare it to the Terran counter, the Marauder:
A 100 mineral, 25 gas armored unit with 125HP, 10 Attack and 30 sec build time and 2 supply.
Wow, a counter that's 25 minerals more expensive, has 20 HP less, 6 Attack less, Takes 3 sec. longer to build and is double the supply cost ... only thing it has going for it is it's superior range/ slightly faster cooldown.
This is the text book example of a terrible post. You make it seem like Marauder have less DMG than roaches which is ridiculous, you just ignore the attack bonus they have against armor, not to mention that D/S wise marauders do even better, not to mention they are faster with stim then speed upgraded roaches, not to mention they have slow, which allows that 3-4 marauders if microed properly can kill off infinite ammount of roaches. Arent you ashamed of making a post based on units stats and ignoring the part which actually demolishes your pitiful argument? It's like saying Thors are terrible defensive units against Mutas and coming up with the stats ignoring the +dmg vs Light of the Thor, and the fact that it s repairable. Or this is a weak and not funny joke, which i do not get?
I suppose it depends on your definition of a terrible post. Posting unit stats as an illustration of your point is surely better than outright claiming something is IMBA and OP? Or is it all about who shouts the loudest?
Also you seem to ignore my claim that 5 Roaches in a straight up battle beat 4 marauders, I've never claimed Marauders don't beat Roaches ... I'm clarifying why the 2 supply roaches are justified (since in superior numbers they still beat their supposed hardcounter in cost-effectiveness).
Also Concussive and Stim are upgrades which are not present by default, but to counter I could say your Roaches could have Burrow and Tunneling Claws which makes them even better against Marauders since they can burrow and regen while the Marauders continually lose 20HP stimming. You seem to handily overlook that Stim is temporary while Roach speed is permanent, making them faster overall.
And yes I forgot the +Armor which makes them do 11 damage instead of 10, my bad even though it really isn't THAT significant in outcome. Am I ashamed? No, not really  ... why would I care about your judgement when there are clearly far worse posts in this thread which you don't bombard? Making it clear you are a Zerg player also (or have only read the last page).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
