|
On October 21 2010 00:24 Jermstuddog wrote:Myth Busting time. Show nested quote +On October 21 2010 00:06 AmstAff wrote:
terrans [...] produce slower than any race Thor build time 60 seconds Ultralisk build time 75 seconds Colossus build time 75 seconds BC build time 90 seconds Broodlord build time 74 seconds Carrier build time 120 seconds Marine build time 25 seconds Zergling build time 24 seconds Zealot build time 38 seconds (28 @ Warp Gate) Marauder build time 30 seconds Roach build time 27 seconds Stalker build time 42 seconds (32 @ Warp Gate) Not even going to mention the difference in tech times as Terran always comes out ahead. Looks pretty competitive/on the low end of build times to me.
How can you post something this ridiculous with a straight face?
Thanks for pointing out that a Z who morphs in one unit at a time will be outproduced by the other races. That's a brilliant observation, and very much worth our time.
|
You are an idiot if you let zerg macro up without applying pressure through hard pushes with toss or drops and pushes with terran. Your statement about the 'tech switch' is incorrect. Yes, larvae can become any unit in the zerg arsenal (save for banelings and brood lords), but in general, zerg structures have less hp (850 for some) and take far longer to build. Like every other race, zerg cannot simply tech EVERYTHING in his arsenal. Not to mention losing an option whilst losing a building. If protoss or terran lose ONE rax/warp gate, they don't lose the ability to make units through all their other ones. This makes zerg tech buildings more valuable than that of other races. Losing a spire is huge based on its cost and low hp, making it very vulnerable to terran drops.
if you let the zerg macro up, he will simply get a tonne of banelings (what i do anyway...) with some infestors to hold you in place (and maybe muta/corruptor/ultra) and trade armies, since he can just rebuild with such speed from hatcheries. It's up to you to put up harass and stop the zerg going 4base+ comfortably, as it is his job to scout and prevent any expansions you try to throw up. It's a game of back and forth, but in essence all zerg really has to do is hold out til the end and win.
If you think this is imba, consider this: zerg cannot make drones and units at the same time. Whilst the other races have worker/unit production from different facilities, zerg must choose between economy and defense early on. As Zerg, I've lost many a game where I cannot hold off a well played all-in attack, mostly due to my greediness in droning up. In this sense, defending and holding off pushes gets very hard to do.
|
Actually I have the opposite problem in lategame zerg situations.
We engage with our 200/200 armies, and obviously I lose. But I can remake my whole army instantly! Right?
Except... well... ultralisks take a full minute to make. So you have 1 minute to walk into my base/expos and just wreck shit. Not to mention that all my units are being created at all my different bases rather than a single block of unit producing structures, this means you can get lots of free kills from stragglers. It is very difficult for zerg to deal with an opponent inside the base.
I really don't understand why people think zerg has such an advantage lategame. Remaking your whole army has never felt like an ideal situation to me. Though maybe I'm just not doing it right...
Like every other race, zerg cannot simply tech EVERYTHING in his arsenal.
I think we're talking about a lategame situation. Personally in that situation I think you can - and should - grab all the tech structures so that you can instantly pump out the hard counters after an army loss.
|
On October 20 2010 23:34 gREIFOCs wrote:Show nested quote +On October 20 2010 21:31 TeWy wrote:
Judging at some of the posts I've recently read on TL, it seems that people are slowly starting to figure out that late game SC2 Zerg has no counter. No? Ultras die to thors, immortals and stimmed marauders with ease. They are actually just terrible against immortals. Broodlords are slow, weak and depend on their range and positioning to be effective. All pro gamers that go broodlords end up loosing some of them, even if the battle is leaning in favour of zerg. Please, explain me, what part of zerg late game "has no counter" as ultras and broodlords can be nullified with the choices that terran and protoss has. Even more, zerg late game, doesn't have a SINGLE UNIT that shoots up. You have to depend on corruptors or hydras which are tier 2 units. So, reading that someone thinks that zerg lategame is imba, when a single BC owns every single tier 3 zerg unit, is strange.
Giving you the benefit of the doubt (i.e. >elementary reading comprehension), I'm assuming you read only the portion you quoted, then responded based on a prediction of where his point was leading; as far as I know the op is discussing macro mechanic imbalance, not late game unit imbalance beyond the notion that t and p don't have satisfactory "kill tons for free" units to deal with said macro.
I don't think anyone who has an issue with ultralisks has animosity towards the unit itself, but the ability to make tons at once. Given that immortals are only decent against roaches prior to ultralisks entering the fray, it's unlikely for a protoss to be immortal heavy going into the transition. Saying a protoss can counter ultralisks with copious amounts of immortals is all well and good, but think about the amount of foresight it takes to have enough to deal with +-9 ultralisks being hatched simultaneously. Saying protoss can cope with it while still maintaining the zerg superiority complex that every facet of play for you is more skill intensive, is parallel to a terran who claimed zerg could deal with the previous reaper abuse with said defense being easier than the assault in my mind. I don't see why early release imbalance should merit reparations being paid to zerg players in the form of people accepting "having your cake and eating it too" argument structure.
As for my personal opinion on the matter, as a protoss player I don't find the pvz matchup fun- this is more important than balance on paper in my mind. As the op stated, if protoss were to win 50% of games before reaching the late game stage, and lose 100% that do, that is statistically balanced- however it isn't fun to me. It seems to me that the vast majority of the zerg arsenal is amazingly simple for protoss to deal with despite the ability to produce so quickly, while a lightning fast switch to mutalisks and later ultralisks are mind-numbingly difficult to cope with. This results in many occurrences of protoss players overcompensating or over-preparing for the possibility of two nightmarish and frustrating units, often being punished by the units they weren't worried about.
One response to the before mentioned fear, is to employ some sort of rush or all-in strategy to prevent either from ever coming into play- and I find it quite understandable that many protoss players feel more comfortable with said tactics considering the alternative. However, from my point of view this makes the matchup stagnant, frustrating, and boring. I'm as much for giving zerg early game options as I am for toning down the macro mechanics. Even with a 50% win rate in the current state of the game, going into the majority of pvz games knowing I will be frustrated for a large portion of the match, win or lose, is exhausting.
On the other hand, regardless of technical balance, I find the pvt matchup to be extremely entertaining. Both have decent early pressure options; Both have some cheese; Both have some early covert tactics; Both have ample room for creativity; Both have the ability to play a macro oriented game; Both have the ability to punish greedy play. There is a standard playout to the matchup (colossi+gateway support->into a way to deal with vikings vs bio+possible tanks+vikings-> a response to protoss responding to viking count), yet there are plenty of nonstandard playouts to the matchup. Additionally, even standard play can lead to unorthodox improvisation once reaching the 'transition away from massive amounts of colossi countered by vikings' stage, and it often does. These can be as minimalistic as kiwkaki using hallucinated phoenixes to tank for colossi, as abrupt as ogsInCa's recent transition from colossi into immortal+storm+gatway, or as ridiculous as TLO vs nazgul on metaloplis. Most of all I can expect some great battles where some sleek micro or positioning abuse will play a major role- unlike pvz, I know I will enjoy myself, win or lose.
|
Well, I think Zerg can reach 200/200 food much faster than P or T if all the harassment failed.
But think about it, Z will get steamrolled vs any other race with 200/200 food.
So Z can never let P or T get 200 food or they will most of the time just lose the game.
And to do that Z must always attack P/T late game in order to keep them under 200 food as long as possible.
But it is much tougher to do that because all the good units are so gas intensive.
So how do you justify that Z is overpowered late game?
Z's units are lousy value over money if you ask me. So how is that balanced?
The answer is this: It is balanced by the fact that Z is much stronger at late game macro.
|
On October 20 2010 23:56 Jermstuddog wrote:
Another point I would like to bring out is, nothing has changed from the Zerg players perspective, this is why they are doing so well after the patch.
Roaches got only slightly better, everything else is the same.
Meanwhile, Terran players have lost their crutch. So while Zerg players are doing the same old thing, Terran players who have been relying on this unfair harassment are now playing against Zergs who are actually able to defend themselves and finding that they have no back-up plan.
Zerg players have been enduring the beating for months while they work on other aspects of the game that they can control. Now that the imba opening phases have been smoothed out, those other aspects are coming to light.
Terrans will catch up in another month.
This. Zerg's being playing at a disadvantage, it's only natural that a slight improvement that helps zerg's early game will see a big improvement of zerg's play, because zerg players actually have more skill than their W/L show.
There are a billion analogies for this, I just randomly thought how zerg has been trying learning to juggle five balls while everyone else juggles four, now zerg is going back to four and naturally finds it easier.
In other words, most zerg's that have been doing standard play have been forced to develop skill to overcome their race deficiency.
|
On October 20 2010 22:02 Alpina wrote:This thread is interesting but there is no evidence in what OP said. I've seen top level players playing ZvT macro games and does not seem like zerg late game is OP. Show nested quote +On October 20 2010 21:50 iG.ClouD wrote:
Zerg has always been the best race to be honest, and now that every single early game harass is taken out of the game they absolutely take no skill at all. I just think Blizzard is incompetent at balancing, and before SC2 WAR3 and WOW were a good example of it. So much nonsense here. What the hell you just said, did you even read what you write?
Alpina, you and many others have not played this game enough it seems. Z is back to pre-release status - the best.
|
On October 21 2010 00:36 AmstAff wrote:Show nested quote +On October 21 2010 00:24 Jermstuddog wrote:Myth Busting time. On October 21 2010 00:06 AmstAff wrote:
terrans [...] produce slower than any race Thor build time 60 seconds Ultralisk build time 75 seconds Colossus build time 75 seconds BC build time 90 seconds Broodlord build time 74 seconds Carrier build time 120 seconds Marine build time 25 seconds Zergling build time 24 seconds Zealot build time 38 seconds (28 @ Warp Gate) Marauder build time 30 seconds Roach build time 27 seconds Stalker build time 42 seconds (32 @ Warp Gate) Not even going to mention the difference in tech times as Terran always comes out ahead. Looks pretty competitive/on the low end of build times to me. nice done... I was talking about economic and you just quote a start of a a sentence and the end of another one. next time better quote all and dont just take the parts that you like and take them out of context!
You make it sound so bad, "Terran" is the quote from the first sentence, I just figured I'd pull it from what you said rather than type it in myself.
But either way, I guess you want to talk about econ.
Ok, lets talk econ.
Every Mule is worth 4 free SCVs for 30 seconds, again, each mule costs 0 minerals and 0 supply. These can be saved up and dropped at the same time, or you can decide not to mule and give yourself instant vision of any area on the map for 10 seconds. I guess all that isn't worth the 150 mineral investment early on though.
Every time a Zerg player makes a building, he loses a drone. This has a major impact on Zergs early game and keeps them from being able to econ and tech simultaneously in an efficient manner like every other race in the game.
Zerg has the slowest movement up the tech tree.
At any rate, Zerg still has to pay the standard 50 minerals and 1 supply per drone. We won't mention that they share a very limited resource (larva) with every other unit in the zerg army. There are no free deals here.
Zerg has the worst defenses of all the races. Spine Crawlers cost just as much as cannons but can't shoot up and don't detect. Spore crawlers can shoot up and detect, but can't hit ground and usually end up being a waste of a drone. Zerg doesn't have the option of installing a giant cannon on top of their hatcheries.
All of these things add up to be a very flimsy macro machine. Sure it's efficient at gathering resources and producing troops once it gets going, but it is slow to start and not very tolerant to harassment.
|
On October 21 2010 00:48 PanzerKing wrote:Show nested quote +On October 21 2010 00:24 Jermstuddog wrote:Myth Busting time. On October 21 2010 00:06 AmstAff wrote:
terrans [...] produce slower than any race Thor build time 60 seconds Ultralisk build time 75 seconds Colossus build time 75 seconds BC build time 90 seconds Broodlord build time 74 seconds Carrier build time 120 seconds Marine build time 25 seconds Zergling build time 24 seconds Zealot build time 38 seconds (28 @ Warp Gate) Marauder build time 30 seconds Roach build time 27 seconds Stalker build time 42 seconds (32 @ Warp Gate) Not even going to mention the difference in tech times as Terran always comes out ahead. Looks pretty competitive/on the low end of build times to me. How can you post something this ridiculous with a straight face? Thanks for pointing out that a Z who morphs in one unit at a time will be outproduced by the other races. That's a brilliant observation, and very much worth our time.
I guess other races only have 1 unit producing building too...
4 gate is strong vs Zerg for a reason, Zerg has a VERY hard time keeping up with the unit-production that 4 gateways is capable of.
At any rate, I say it with as straight a face as those who claim Terran production capabilities are slow.
|
On October 21 2010 00:46 Samhax wrote:Show nested quote +On October 21 2010 00:42 Sadist wrote:On October 21 2010 00:29 Samhax wrote:On October 21 2010 00:18 Mensab wrote:
Regarding Marine vs Roach that people were arguing about earlier. Messed around with the unit tester and....
You need at least 3:1 odds in order to beat roaches. So its 150 mineral cost and 3 food vs 75 minerals and 2 food and 25 gas.
You start throwing in stim and shield and it becomes 1.5:1/1:1 ish (depending on concave/creep), but arguably that also means that there will be less marines and you are delaying tech for those two upgrades.
Not to mention that in order to accumulate enough marines you need to at least have 2 barracks (either via reactor or actually getting 2 barracks).
So I have nfc why people are stating that roaches barely deal with marines. You can of course start throwing in medivacs and marauders, but then that becomes a question of unit composition vs unit composition.
Just throw 20 marines with combat shield and without stimpack against 10 roaches and you will see what happen roaches are 2 food in name only, they are cheaper than 2 food units and are easily massed. You just need the supply opened up. for me 75 mineral 25 gas=100 mineral, and marines are massable with 5+ rax, so what's your point?
except you play terran and he plays zerg so to him your perception is very wrong. for a zerg player Gas is at about a 1-3 mineral ratio depending on how many workers you have mining gas.
For every one saturated geyser thats a potential 3 mineral pr second except the workers are mining gas.
So in the eyes of a zerg player the roach is more like a 150 mineral unit but its cheap on larvae so it has its pros and cons. Cons far outweighing the pros.
I dont even see why this is being argued in a zvp thread but roaches even with their new increased range are not cost effective against marines especially once upgrades start streaming out for terran while zergs tend to be more moderate in getting their upgrades.
For every roach the zerg makesearly on, thats another drone that could have been mining
Now back to the OP. The Zerg macro issue
There is no issue as all of zergs units are designed in such a fashion that they will evaporate in a 200 / 200 engagement. The issue is with early protoss agression not being as effective as it used to be so your forced to play a bit more reactionary turtle style, more on the defence, more reliant on your observers to see the map.
A zerg unit is supposed to be good at small army engagements and outside of a close to perfect concave or close to perfect flank the roach for instance is an absolutely TERRIBLE unit.
Even tier 3 follows this logic, adding one ultralisk to your army when you already have 6-8 is a terrible choice for zerg because diverse army composition and superior positioning often times than not tip the scales into zergs favour.
|
I remember back when terran's in broodwar thought terran couldn't play a really strong macro style straight up.....
Then came iloveoov.
Terran's don't know how to play macro games properly yet because they have never had to. They could just do tons of damage in the first few minutes of the game and either win or continue with that advantage. Terrans can still do plenty of early to mid game damage. A problem on teamliquid is that people over generalize every scenario such as "omg roach range increase now hellion harass is completely thwarted i cant even harass zerg and cant use thor hellion banshee midgame push ahhhhhh". Do you realize how stupid that sounds?
maybe try creating timing pushes mid to late game that are in between zerg tech switches (before hive) etc.
And like everyone said before me - zergs have been getting beat down early game for months having to perfect everything about the early game just to stand a chance half the time. It is only logical that they catch up when the patches are released. All those 70 apm terrans that rely on ok micro and build order wins against zerg are dropping FAST. Terran has tons of options throughout the game however it may start to take broodwar like APM to begin to realize their full potential. Sounds good to me.
|
On October 21 2010 01:06 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 20 2010 22:02 Alpina wrote:This thread is interesting but there is no evidence in what OP said. I've seen top level players playing ZvT macro games and does not seem like zerg late game is OP. On October 20 2010 21:50 iG.ClouD wrote:
Zerg has always been the best race to be honest, and now that every single early game harass is taken out of the game they absolutely take no skill at all. I just think Blizzard is incompetent at balancing, and before SC2 WAR3 and WOW were a good example of it. So much nonsense here. What the hell you just said, did you even read what you write? Alpina, you and many others have not played this game enough it seems. Z is back to pre-release status - the best.
Not pre-release but in early beta. Pre-release zerg was weakest 
Anyway I don't get why everyone is whining here - not much has changed in recent months. I mean yeah some changes are huge like reaper nerf, proxy barack nerf, but they don't really influence the late game.
Yeah roach range is nice buff but nothing gamebreaking. I don't think a lot of changed in ZvT or ZvP late game in recent patches.
Btw don't forget ultra dmg and spash nerf.
|
United States17042 Posts
This discussion isn't going anywhere. No one can cite any progames or...anything to back up these points. The best that I can come up with in response to the op is that zerg macro is different from T and P - possibly better, possibly worse, but for this we're talking about the same difference that existed in bw, which ended up being a balanced rts over the course of years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
