|
On June 20 2010 07:37 Artosis wrote:
2) you are actually saying to me over and over that mech isn't that good on Desert, and thus its a zerg map. IdrA and I directly disagree with Desert being a Zerg map vs Terran, due to the reasons we put.
You and Idra have also demonstrated repeatedly that you think Zerg is at a disadvantage in almost every single topic brought up, so this doesn't sound very exceptional to most people.
|
Man I thought there'd be some balance discussion but this thread seems to be mostly just haters. I don't think this is that biased at all and the map pool isn't too great. I don't know how much we should be concerned about it as I'm kind of expecting sweeping changes as we enter the next beta phase.
|
NOT because of any mech garbage, as mech wasn't even thought about in the creation of this article. Notice we even explained that SEn went 1 hatch mutalisk here because of how ridiculous it is to fight off a thor drop.
And thor drop isn't a mech play how? And guess what it transitions into. Mech. Stop pretending you are the be-all and end-all one-stop shop for balance discussions.
|
On June 20 2010 07:44 Drowsy wrote:
Man I thought there'd be some balance discussion but this thread seems to be mostly just haters. I don't think this is that biased at all and the map pool isn't too great. I don't know how much we should be concerned about it as I'm kind of expecting sweeping changes as we enter the next beta phase.
Nobody is hating, the original article was just terrible. Writing an article on Zerg map balance and completely neglecting to mention Scrap Station is a poor excuse for writing and a clear excuse to feed the Zerg Victimization Syndrome.
|
I think that there is too much emphasis being placed on the maps and their balance issues. None of the maps are necessarily IMBALANCED to the degree where they are unplayable in any of the matchups. Each map is different, and for this reason, players should recognize that some strategies that work well on certain maps (say Maps "A") do not work so well on other maps (maps "B"). Conversely, some strategies that did not seem viable on "A" could potentially be extremely powerful on "B". I believe this is why you (Artosis/Idra/others) believe these maps are "imbalanced". You two are exceptionally strong with the general build orders and strategies you are used to, thus you shine on maps "A" where those builds are especially viable. HOWEVER, you have to recognize that these "imbalanced" maps require a reworking of your usual styles, and it is not until you have thoroughly experimented with other build variations that you can objectively state that maps "B" are "imbalanced" for the Zerg race or the X race.
An example of this is terran play. The early stages of beta saw most Terran using MMM ball strategies or variants of it, and by the end of the beta phase, the majority of Terran adapted to mech-centric builds. The basic reasons for this are two-fold. Bio had been "figured out" and was being beaten much more often and mech was still very new and unexplored, and secondly, certain maps catered to Terran mech, thus producing some desirable results for terrans. Granted, this build change had less to do with maps and more to do with the general matchups but the fundamental idea is directly related to this issue of apparent map imbalances. Map differences are simply another factor that needs to be considered when working out optimal strategies.
The fundamental problem is that Zerg players (I am one myself) need to recognize that the metagame is evolving and you have to embrace these changes and recognize that you need to adjust accordingly. Each new strategy has new strong points and new weaknesses, and its up to the players to recognize the strengths and weaknesses of certain builds in conjunction with the strengths and weaknesses of the maps. Until players begin to accept that sometimes certain maps cater to drastic changes in playstyle, they will continue to blame map imbalances and make no progress.
/wall
|
Zerg can perfectly FE on dessert and hold thor drop with proper foresight and scouting its just fast muta are better vs it, the only map were a zerg expo isnt possible till air control is LT due thor cliff abuse and my 10rax/FE opener.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On June 20 2010 07:37 Artosis wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2010 01:00 FrozenArbiter wrote:On June 20 2010 00:26 Artosis wrote:
FA;
Tank/Thor/Hellion is mech. This, I thought, was obvious.
if even 1 person could read what was written, they would see that i did not take mech builds into consideration at all when writing this. lol@ the flamers who don't understand what's written. What?
For people still calling me biased, you didn't read the article very well. These are the 3 maps which IdrA and I feel are the very worst for Zerg. Future articles will have the maps which are the best for Zerg. These maps will outline what parts of the maps are good for Zerg.
If some idiot who clearly just signed up for the forum recently comes by and accuses me of hiding interviews because opinions of the people who I interviewed had different opinions from myself, what the fvck? Obviously that shit shouldnt be allowed.
Fine, that's great, but Desert Oasis is not bad for zerg. If you wanna call Steppes, LT, Incineration Zone, Kulas bad for zerg - be my guest. Desert? That's like the best zerg map in the pool as long as the game goes past early :[ 1) you are the one who brought up mech, and then thought i did, because i mentioned units which weren't made out of flesh. 2) you are actually saying to me over and over that mech isn't that good on Desert, and thus its a zerg map. IdrA and I directly disagree with Desert being a Zerg map vs Terran, due to the reasons we put. NOT because of any mech garbage, as mech wasn't even thought about in the creation of this article. Notice we even explained that SEn went 1 hatch mutalisk here because of how ridiculous it is to fight off a thor drop. In fact, so many people are trying to counter our well thought out arguments by saying "its a big map, thats good for zerg, its a zerg map." YES, big maps are good for Zerg. NO, Desert is not one of them vs Terran.
You say you don't take mech builds into consideration, then you list Thor drops and viking builds as part of the reason why the map is bad for zerg - can you not see the contradiction?
Yes, there's a lot of cheese possibilities vs Zerg on this map, but to say this makes it a Terran map is almost as absurd to me as saying Bifrost is a Protoss map vs Zerg because there's a lot of cheese potential -_-
You'd bloody better do a shitload of damage to the zerg with whatever early aggro opener you choose on DO, cause midgame there's fuck all you can do.
|
I prefer maps to be very different to encourage different sorts of play. I agree that on Kulas Ravine, there are some serious challenges versus zerg given the current zerg playstyle; however, why does the zerg playstyle have to be the same? Everyone talks about map-specific builds, maybe that map just requires a completely different playstyle? Encouraging either 1-base play, taking the rock expo first (delayed expo) or fast expanding as zerg but using early zerglings to break the rock so as to minimize any harass on the ledge.
I actually think the rocks give zerg many options for expanding naturally and maintaining creep paths if they can keep their natural up.
As for the unit spread, yes this encourages smaller engagements, so maybe zerg needs many smaller armies to hit at several points? Or maybe earlier pressure to prevent buildup of a larger army? Or maybe this encourages a different unit composition.
I used to be one to get on topics of imbalance, but I feel now that any disadvantage can be turned to an advantage with a different playstyle. I'd be pleased to see some new zerg playstyles come out on Kulas that counters these statements. If one doesn't come up then hey they were right and have some legit points; however, I'm not going to be so quick to throw away a map which I think is really interesting (Protoss here, who hates the vulnerability of that natural).
|
A)
I struggled a lot on Desert Oasis to various terran cheese tactics: early reaper/marines with a bunker below mineral line, siege tank attacking my refinery and hatchery from the cliff off to the side...
The cliff at the natural of Kulas Ravine is very annoying!
Wide open chokes are hard to defend, while a narrow choke gives a lot of power to Force Fields and tanks. Ever had that experience where a warp prism comes in with a few sentries to your ramp, FF it (over and over) and warp in a handful of reinforcements?
I believe every map element can have their own strengths and weaknesses!
I simply blame myself for not being good enough, or going for 14 pool/hatch instead of a safer 12 pool...
Certain maps in BW would seem to favor one match up over another until someone comes along with something innovative.
B)
Zerg is extremely mobile, we have:
- Creep
- Nydus Network (protoss can warp in limited units, but we can send an entire army!)
- Cheap overlord transports (day9's TLO special gave me the idea of doing a fake drop while a nydus is digging through)
- Speedlings run at insane speeds on creep acting as good front line defenders
Through creep tumors and clever overlord placements, we can also have vision of a large portion of the map.
A lot of units can burrow, a gimmicky ability but not everyone bring observers with their army early game, opening ambush opportunities. On the last week of beta I have had a lot of fun with baneling mines at chokes during team games!
C)
Without a 2nd hatch, I feel that it is very difficult for zerg to catch up with unit production and economy. What to do/what to change to make zerg 1 base play more viable?
I also feel Zerg relies a lot on lair tech. Marines/Marauder, zealot/stalker/sentry are all very viable unit comps... zerglings + roachs are very meh...
Instead of saying something is imbalanced, how about exploring options in making use of similar map elements, or seeing if blizzard would give zerg a new tool? Imagine if speedlings can fly up cliffs with those wings XD.
|
The huge early advantage of a hellion/marine or reaper rush should promote a change in game-play as a response to this, not just claiming that the map is insanely overpowered and should be ignored.
A later expansion, once your defensive capabilities have caught up with your expansive, might be able to defend against a hellion harassment.
A map like DO, which favors harassment will require some non-standard play to allow for zerg to overcome the strong harassing abilities of terran.
|
I'm a Zerg player and I agree on most of Artosis's points
And what if generate creep was Tier 1 ;O
I know it might provoke Zergling rushes but how is it not blown out hard not to scout? o_o
Also I believe maps should be Brood War size again, it gave alot more options for all races since Sc2 maps are amazingly small
|
On June 20 2010 08:25 Hikari wrote:
A)
I struggled a lot on Desert Oasis to various terran cheese tactics: early reaper/marines with a bunker below mineral line, siege tank attacking my refinery and hatchery from the cliff off to the side...
The cliff at the natural of Kulas Ravine is very annoying!
Wide open chokes are hard to defend, while a narrow choke gives a lot of power to Force Fields and tanks. Ever had that experience where a warp prism comes in with a few sentries to your ramp, FF it (over and over) and warp in a handful of reinforcements?
I believe every map element can have their own strengths and weaknesses!
I simply blame myself for not being good enough, or going for 14 pool/hatch instead of a safer 12 pool...
Certain maps in BW would seem to favor one match up over another until someone comes along with something innovative.
B)
Zerg is extremely mobile, we have:
- Creep
- Nydus Network (protoss can warp in limited units, but we can send an entire army!)
- Cheap overlord transports (day9's TLO special gave me the idea of doing a fake drop while a nydus is digging through)
- Speedlings run at insane speeds on creep acting as good front line defenders
Through creep tumors and clever overlord placements, we can also have vision of a large portion of the map.
A lot of units can burrow, a gimmicky ability but not everyone bring observers with their army early game, opening ambush opportunities. On the last week of beta I have had a lot of fun with baneling mines at chokes during team games!
C)
Without a 2nd hatch, I feel that it is very difficult for zerg to catch up with unit production and economy. What to do/what to change to make zerg 1 base play more viable?
I also feel Zerg relies a lot on lair tech. Marines/Marauder, zealot/stalker/sentry are all very viable unit comps... zerglings + roachs are very meh...
Instead of saying something is imbalanced, how about exploring options in making use of similar map elements, or seeing if blizzard would give zerg a new tool? Imagine if speedlings can fly up cliffs with those wings XD.
I totally agree, Zerglings are meh late game against Collosi and Hellions so Zerg is more unlikely to get them in large numbers
Roaches is a meh, not bad but not entirely great either
|
only thing I agree with OP is scouting distances on kulas ravine are a pain...
adapting your opening builds based on certain maps will come with time. Its too early to tell.
Zerg Player
|
On June 20 2010 07:37 Artosis wrote:
2) ..... NOT because of any mech garbage, as mech wasn't even thought about in the creation of this article.
....Notice we even explained that SEn went 1 hatch mutalisk here because of how ridiculous it is to fight off a thor drop....
Just read what u just wrote Artosis.....tut tut tut, so just cause Thors got Arnold Swarchenegger voice and he played in terminator and he had human look with flesh and such - he was still a terminator - a machine....
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Notice we even explained that SEn went 1 hatch mutalisk here because of how ridiculous it is to fight off a thor drop.
Another thing I want to point out about this: Why do you think Terrans and Protoss players cheese on every other game on this map? Because we don't feel that playing a normal game vs zerg on this map is going to end well for us.
On June 20 2010 07:45 iEchoic wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2010 07:44 Drowsy wrote:
Man I thought there'd be some balance discussion but this thread seems to be mostly just haters. I don't think this is that biased at all and the map pool isn't too great. I don't know how much we should be concerned about it as I'm kind of expecting sweeping changes as we enter the next beta phase. Nobody is hating, the original article was just terrible. Writing an article on Zerg map balance and completely neglecting to mention Scrap Station is a poor excuse for writing and a clear excuse to feed the Zerg Victimization Syndrome.
I'm assuming you think Scrap Station is zerg favoured? I actually feel like it's balanced/T favoured TvZ at least O_o
I'd pick scrap station a million times before I picked desert oasis vs Zerg.
|
On June 20 2010 08:54 jtgizmo wrote:
Just read what u just wrote Artosis.....tut tut tut, so just cause Thors got Arnold Swarchenegger voice and he played in terminator and he had human look with flesh and such - he was still a terminator - a machine....
I seriously LOL'd
On June 20 2010 08:11 FrozenArbiter wrote:
You'd bloody better do a shitload of damage to the zerg with whatever early aggro opener you choose on DO, cause midgame there's fuck all you can do.
I got to agree. Zerg on DO can expand like hell while others are left to expand at like 40-50 food at the earliest and will be able to use any real aggression or risk getting their main raped.
|
Short rush distance, long scout distance-
While Kulas has reasonably short rush distances it actually has very slow scouting for Zerg. The other four player maps have close air positions, meaning your overlord scout eliminates a base quickly, but on Kulas, this isn't the case. This makes fast expanding az Zerg much more risky, as you are less likely to see bunker rush or reaper builds in time. This is not imbalanced itself, but it puts Zerg in an uncomfortable position that makes dealing with subsequent pressure much more difficult.
OMG THANK YOU! even though the map is huge, the distance is only moderate, not long. A cross position 6 pool on this map wouldn't harm the Zerg or benefit the Protoss at all.
|
In all the problems you listed, you're basically saying zerg will have trouble defending their bases if they expanded... but isn't that true for the opponent as well? So whats the problem? Plus why do zergs always feel obligated to expand?
Worst map is incineration zone by far, don't even need a reason, it was taken off ladder play for the final few weeks of beta phase 1.
|
I have noticed that you and Idra have expressed on multiple occasions that the Zerg have no advantage in any situation, on any map, at any time, ever.
I respect you guys a lot, but doesn't this seem a bit ridiculous, even to you?
|
On June 20 2010 10:26 eScaper-tsunami wrote:
In all the problems you listed, you're basically saying zerg will have trouble defending their bases if they expanded... but isn't that true for the opponent as well? So whats the problem? Plus why do zergs always feel obligated to expand?
Worst map is incineration zone by far, don't even need a reason, it was taken off ladder play for the final few weeks of beta phase 1.
Zergs have to expand because they simply can't win without a macro advantage. And, our production building is also our main building, so we basically need more hatches to be able to produce enough units.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
