|
I am sorry to say, but this feels as yet another "IdrA and Artosis whining about underpowered Zerg" post. They always claim they are "objective", but how can they really be after just a few months of beta with HUGE changes to balance between the races (Roach food nerf anyone?)?
It also feels absolutely unobjective because Desert Oasis is really favored for Zerg IF they dont stick to ground only armies and IF they arent lazy with creep tumors. I always thought Zerg wanted wide and open maps, but it seems like they only want flat maps without any choke points for the opponents and a worm hole for Overlords into their opponents base. Excuse the sarcasm, but these claims of "objectivity" are a bit arrogant and thus devaluing the whole thing.
On June 19 2010 20:07 Artosis wrote:
KULAS RAVINE
Short rush distance, long scout distance-
Well life is tough and its the same for everyone. Zerg already have the fastest worker production capability, so why not use them to scout? Many are doing it already and if a Terran is walled in, well the Protoss cant get a look at his base either.
On June 19 2010 20:07 Artosis wrote:
Wide-open natural expansion, long distance from main hatchery to expansion hatchery-
Arent Zerg usually the ones who complain about not having wide open spaces? Look at it this way: THEIR naturals are wide and open too and if THEY expand somewhere else maybe you should do that too ...
On June 19 2010 20:07 Artosis wrote:
Large ledge behind natural expansion-
The ledge behind the natural expansion can cause huge problems for Zerg.
Well its the same bad spot for every race or does the map change for Zerg only? Maybe you should stop considering that expansion "the natural" and rather focus on the one behind the rocks? Many others (Terran and Protoss) arent expanding there either and rather take the one behind the rocks.
Personally I think this is getting too much attention due to the "fame factor". It is written one-sidedly and not objective at all, but at least he says so in the beginning. Wasnt there a rule against these kinds of posts on the forum?
While there are many "unusual things" on Kulas Ravine it is only hard because people havent figured out how to play on it yet. Who is to say that there wont be an unbeatable Zerg Kulas tactic in six months? The thing is that Artosis doesnt like the map and thus writes an article about its supposed imbalance. But most of these points work FOR EVERYONE, so they are balanced in fact. The only real imbalance is that Zerg doesnt have early artillery (I consider the Brood Lords to be artillery) and cliff jumpers; but they have burrowed movers instead.
|
Without even looking at the complaints themselves, how can it be objective when:
Only one race is represented. (Artosis and Idra's main race)
Not all match-ups are covered.
Mech play is left out on purpose. (Nobody knows a good way to play against it yet? Maybe you don't know a good way to play these maps yet.)
No pros, only cons.
Contradictions.
Disclaimer saying this is "top-level" only talk. "Top-level" Zergs seem to be doing fine.
This looks to me like a very long and glorified whine post even if that wasn't your intent.
edit:
In the comments you wrote
Oh, and as for Desert Oasis, we realize many people feel it is a Zerg favored map. This just isn't the case on the Asian server. At the very top level, Terran is pretty much unbeatable there.
Just because a certain MU is dominant in one region compared to the others doesn't mean there is a map imbalance. People need to stop caring about regions and look at the overall if you ask me.
|
On June 20 2010 06:51 Madkipz wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2010 06:38 stroggos wrote:On June 20 2010 06:16 Madkipz wrote:lol, so it takes idra 4 days of practice to almost qualify for osl but months to learn a new build order for a ladder map yes, its not about build order its about style, its about how he wants the mid to late game to play out. about what units he is familliar with useing and how he incorporates them to follow with him as he transitions into higher tiers of game. THere is a GIANT unsurmountable difference between Practice and changing your entire game STYLE. Na its really easy actually, for example after roach nerf idra instantly started using a hydra/ling orientated game and raped just as hard. If you already have the skill inherent then it's pretty easy to switch up, that's why all the Good BW players are good at SC2 and the switch was instant thats not a game style switch, he is still using the same broad strokes as before in that he will get an expansion, start saturating while defending with as few units as possible, barely suriving and suddenly sprinting upwards of 150 / 200 while he takes his third and possibly fourth. Now if he had suddenly started useing spire units for his mid game i could admit that ok i am wrong but i dont think that in the instant that roaches got nerfed he switched his entire style. He just switched the focus towards a more Hydralisk sentric army earlier on.
and he told you all this didnt he? stop assuming things you fool.
|
"Terran is pretty much unbeatable [on desert oasis]". FFS. I've played so many RTSes in my life and every single thing time "x is unbeatable by y" has been said so close to a game's release it's been completely wrong. Anyone without a star by their name would have been banned by now.
User was warned for this post
|
I always thought having Nydus networks from main to expans on DO was pretty good. Are these Zerg players who are complaining using them? It's not that hard to get lair tech. I have nothing but respect for idrA but I've never seen him use a Nydus network defensively or offensively in probably 50+ replays.
|
On June 20 2010 14:49 DooMDash wrote:
I always thought having Nydus networks from main to expans on DO was pretty good. Are these Zerg players who are complaining using them? It's not that hard to get lair tech. I have nothing but respect for idrA but I've never seen him use a Nydus network defensively or offensively in probably 50+ replays.
I think this is the biggest problem. IdrA is basically a macro machine - there's no creativity in his play (from everything I've seen). He plays Zerg like a standard Terran macro game, and I think this causes a lot of his problems.
|
Excellent and very factual information, thnx for the interesting read. Clearly T is still way OP.
|
I will still go with morrow's initial post.
I have nothing to say that hasn't been said except:
A. Players know more than Blizzard about the game as they make 3 different games while players do nothing but play.
B. Blizzard failed to balance each map but atleast they were able to balance the whole map pool.
Not all maps are zerg favored and not all maps are zerg WoW(worst of the worst).Applies to the other races.
C. Why do you think spl has a lot of mirror matches? Why would both coach sends players from the same race on a certain map? Because every map has a dominant race even though they are made by kespa. I'm not saying "go play mirrors". I'm saying that no map is balanced. There is no such thing as:
50-50 TvP
50-50 ZvP
50-50 TvZ
D. Famous players revolutionizing playstyles has something to do with this. Just like the protoss with Carriers(years ago) vs terran and Bisu build vs z, not long after that both t and z was able to counter everything with ease. There are just times a certain season that a race thrives on certain maps. It just happens that this time a certain playstyle(mech) is dominant on certain maps(DO, IZ, KR [not in my opinion, only from what i had read in this thread]).
Peace!!!!!!
|
On June 20 2010 15:04 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2010 14:49 DooMDash wrote:
I always thought having Nydus networks from main to expans on DO was pretty good. Are these Zerg players who are complaining using them? It's not that hard to get lair tech. I have nothing but respect for idrA but I've never seen him use a Nydus network defensively or offensively in probably 50+ replays. I think this is the biggest problem. IdrA is basically a macro machine - there's no creativity in his play (from everything I've seen). He plays Zerg like a standard Terran macro game, and I think this causes a lot of his problems.
He seems to be stuck in BW. In the "Nerds of the Round Table" interview, i believe Idra and Artosis both said that TLO's very creative playstyle isn't going to work once SC2 hits it's prime.
If you ask me though, it looks like he's doing fine with his Zerg play even against Terran mech which Artosis claims is not fully understood.
These are player issues, not map issues.
|
guys, you might check comments on mymym.com, as there are some interesting ones, such as Demuslim's comment.
|
It is hilarious to me that anyone takes artosis' comments on balance seriously. Dont any of you ever actually watch weekly's? Hes an awesome guy and contributes a lot, but there arent many people that are as biased as him
|
Of course this thread would become provocative, when only bad sides of zerg were talked of.
As a zerg, it's pretty easy to relate to points made - none are absolutely incorrect. But I guess it goes for all of map pool - maps being too small make them mostly terran favoring. I find it funny how metalo is even considered bad for terran because it has less imbalanced cliffs than half of other maps. Metalo still ends up being the map where in TvX only terrans can take the gold. When race gets too used to some imbalance, people start to call it imbalanced if they do NOT get that advantage every game. Speaking as zerg I haven't considered any of the zerg nerfs truly overboard. Game balance actually has felt really good lately, but some of the maps are turning things around too much. If Z is supposed to be fine with all the bad stuff terran can do, isn't that unfair towards TOSS? Does terran really need these cliffs that force zerg to do supersafe builds to not lose against any harrasses to keep the matchup balanced? I haven't felt metalo being freewin for me - what sort of equal balance issue should there be serving zerg compared to what maps like kulas are in zvt? This can't last forever that maps are friggin tunnels that don't allow almost any flanking and way too little dropping.
It's not just the scene turning more teenywhiney - maps simply aren't up to par with balance standards of what people used to get in iccup. That shouldn't be news for anyone, so what's the point in such raging flamefest? Very few of the maps seems as balanced as almost any of the proleague maps from recent years. I can only hope the map pool gets decent changes, hopefully in form of bigger maps and cliffs more often being closer to middle rather than 1st expansions/mains 
|
This is a terrible article. It's obvious that idra and artosis just simply are not capable of looking at balance objectively. Time and time again it's 'Zerg is so underpowered!' when at high levels of play P/Z dominate and in Asia Z dominates.
After the first few articles/interviews/videos of them talking about 'balance' at the start of beta it was pretty apparent that they should just be ignored on the subject.
|
On June 20 2010 15:18 Backpack wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2010 15:04 Stratos_speAr wrote:On June 20 2010 14:49 DooMDash wrote:
I always thought having Nydus networks from main to expans on DO was pretty good. Are these Zerg players who are complaining using them? It's not that hard to get lair tech. I have nothing but respect for idrA but I've never seen him use a Nydus network defensively or offensively in probably 50+ replays. I think this is the biggest problem. IdrA is basically a macro machine - there's no creativity in his play (from everything I've seen). He plays Zerg like a standard Terran macro game, and I think this causes a lot of his problems. He seems to be stuck in BW. In the "Nerds of the Round Table" interview, i believe Idra and Artosis both said that TLO's very creative playstyle isn't going to work once SC2 hits it's prime. If you ask me though, it looks like he's doing fine with his Zerg play even against Terran mech which Artosis claims is not fully understood. These are player issues, not map issues.
Your response to their assertion that TLO won't have as much success when SC2 hits it's prime is that he has success now?
I agree that these are not solely map issues (as I posted earlier in this thread), but your logic is rather flawed.
|
On June 20 2010 15:57 Alou wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2010 15:18 Backpack wrote:On June 20 2010 15:04 Stratos_speAr wrote:On June 20 2010 14:49 DooMDash wrote:
I always thought having Nydus networks from main to expans on DO was pretty good. Are these Zerg players who are complaining using them? It's not that hard to get lair tech. I have nothing but respect for idrA but I've never seen him use a Nydus network defensively or offensively in probably 50+ replays. I think this is the biggest problem. IdrA is basically a macro machine - there's no creativity in his play (from everything I've seen). He plays Zerg like a standard Terran macro game, and I think this causes a lot of his problems. He seems to be stuck in BW. In the "Nerds of the Round Table" interview, i believe Idra and Artosis both said that TLO's very creative playstyle isn't going to work once SC2 hits it's prime. If you ask me though, it looks like he's doing fine with his Zerg play even against Terran mech which Artosis claims is not fully understood. These are player issues, not map issues. Your response to their assertion that TLO won't have as much success when SC2 hits it's prime is that he has success now? I agree that these are not solely map issues (as I posted earlier in this thread), but your logic is rather flawed.
It's simply more support that shows that IdrA (and probably Artosis) are probably still stuck in this incredibly dull, macro only play with absolutely zero creativity that only the T from BW could get away with.
|
Sen seems to do fine w/ Zerg on these maps.
|
I'm not entirely sure why everyone seems to think this even SHOULD be an objective article. It's an article that is SPECIFICALLY targeted to high level ZERG map difficulties, from the perspective of Artosis and Idra.
Would you guys really want an article by a pro player that just totes the mob opinion, or would you rather see what the unfiltered opinion of a pro or two? I'd choose the later; not only is it more interesting, but you can also glean some very useful information from it. So thanks Artosis, for posting this. Keep up the good work, you really help to bring the pro-scene to those of us who are not a part of it/new to Starcraft.
As FrozenArbiter said (I think, I'm too lazy to go check if it was him or not) a post like this can really be gold for some people. If you read this and go "well that's a silly opinion, I'll argue against it on the interwebs!" you're probably looking at it the wrong way. Giving your own opinion is one thing; criticizing his opinion is another.
Posts like Artosis' are very useful. There is a world of difference between beating your head against a wall and thinking "I must be making some mistake or not playing well enough, but I'm trying to accomplish the right thing" and seeing a player like Artosis complain about something similar and thinking, "ok, maybe I'm not just playing poorly, maybe I'm just going about it the wrong way and need to rethink my goal/strategy."
That being said, I suppose I should actually address the ideas in the article. Oh god, Incineration Zone was a nightmare for me on the ladder. I would get so frustrated, because it seemed like I could just never do anything against Terran or Protoss. Small chokes and lots of areas you can abuse the cliffs create just murderous situations for Zerg armies. It really felt like they took all the worst parts of Kulas and created an entire tiny map out of it. Zerg has this very interesting style to them where you really need wide spaces in order to outmaneuver the enemy army, and it's just not realistically possible on a map like Incineration Zone. Kulas isn't as bad for me, but any time there is terrain that allows Terran or Protoss to take a 'map control' advantage over Zerg you will just have a horrible time dealing with it.
Desert Oasis, I am still on the fence about. Protoss is hard to address for the same things Artosis mentioned; it wouldn't really be about map balance, it'd be about play vs. a specific build. The map in general does feel Zerg favored once you are able to establish your expansion. It's pretty easy for the Zerg player to outmaneuver Terran and Protoss armies in the mid/late game, and as a result it's very hard for them to hold more then their natural.
|
On June 20 2010 16:17 w_Ender_w wrote:
Would you guys really want an article by a pro player that just totes the mob opinion, or would you rather see what the unfiltered opinion of a pro or two?
It doesn't have to be filtered, it just has to be unbiased. Not hard. Artosis and IdrA are known for complaining about imbalance and it's pretty obvious they aren't unbiased at all.
|
On June 20 2010 16:24 iEchoic wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2010 16:17 w_Ender_w wrote:
Would you guys really want an article by a pro player that just totes the mob opinion, or would you rather see what the unfiltered opinion of a pro or two? It doesn't have to be filtered, it just has to be unbiased. Not hard. Artosis and IdrA are known for complaining about imbalance and it's pretty obvious they aren't unbiased at all.
It's an article that is advertised as two Zerg players giving their opinion on what maps cause Zerg players problems at high level play.
At what point did you expect no bias, or did it become necessary to be unbiased?
|
On June 20 2010 16:30 w_Ender_w wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2010 16:24 iEchoic wrote:On June 20 2010 16:17 w_Ender_w wrote:
Would you guys really want an article by a pro player that just totes the mob opinion, or would you rather see what the unfiltered opinion of a pro or two? It doesn't have to be filtered, it just has to be unbiased. Not hard. Artosis and IdrA are known for complaining about imbalance and it's pretty obvious they aren't unbiased at all. It's an article that is advertised as two Zerg players giving their opinion on what maps cause Zerg players problems at high level play. At what point did you expect no bias, or did it become necessary to be unbiased?
"I will be writing several articles on the balance of various things in SC2 and I decided that the first one would have to be map balance. This will be an objective look at the theory and practice of the balance of the current set of SC2 maps in the Zerg matchups."
At what point should we NOT expect it to be unbiased? He states right off the bat that he wants it to be an objective look at the map balance as it pertains to zerg. Then he ignores some aspects of a particular zerg matchup and seemingly ignores anything that doesnt have a fast expansion or anything beyond the first 6 minutes of the game.
There ARE builds other than 14 pool 15 hatch that can be used to great success.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
