EPTWhy so much Terran success in GSL? - Page 22
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
gilga
United States24 Posts
| ||
|
Chise
Japan507 Posts
On January 21 2011 05:51 AlBundy wrote: I don't see any reason why Zerg couldn't come up with BOs that allows pressure, expanding, mid-game transitions etc. Simply because any early pressure from Zerg is almost an Allin. | ||
|
Treemonkeys
United States2082 Posts
On January 21 2011 05:51 AlBundy wrote: I don't see any reason why Zerg couldn't come up with BOs that allows pressure, expanding, mid-game transitions etc. Then you don't understand zerg. At all. | ||
|
Mooncat
Germany1228 Posts
#1 As some people already mentioned, Terran could have been OP in the beginning => lots of Terrans place high in the first GSL => lots of Terrans are seeded for the next GSL => assuming even outcomes, more Terrans will place high again => more Terran seeds => and so on #2 Could be a Korea/SEA thing. Outside of Korea Protoss seems to be the "dominant" race, but maybe that's just me. Not so much of a statistics fanatic personally, but I think there are even some stats to support this like race distribution in Master League, etc. Just two (imho) very possible and plausible off the top of my head, I'm pretty sure there are some more. This poll just fuels race/map imba rants imho, although I have to admit that I don't like the Blizzard maps very much either. | ||
|
AndAgain
United States2621 Posts
| ||
|
branflakes14
2082 Posts
| ||
|
pigtheman
United States333 Posts
On January 20 2011 20:05 lastmotion wrote: exactly what i wanted to say. the entire sc2 community was complaining about Terran being OP and then few patches come that doesn't change the inherent problems like mule, PF, marauder and T supporters over-exaggerate what the patch did so people actually started to believe everything was balanced...and then over time, people are still curious why T is still dominating? imo, nothing drastic changed. I have been praying to blizzard to nerf marauders since beta and the only thing that they do is make concussive shells a 50/50 tech. I say this and I USE marauders in all three matchups very often so it shows how serious it is this is how i feel too. take away from T's early game and give a slight buff to T's late game. Nerfing Marauders = Hinder's T's early game Give T a decent T3 unit that can be massed like Ultras (Thors is out of the question because they can be neural parasited) LOl and chorno isnt? or even injecting larva? or even 1a collosus? your view seems pretty biased i dont even use maruders.. havent even used maruders for uhh at least the past 20 games... not a single one.. i dont know but i doubt many people have the right to judge right now O.O cause there have not been enough results | ||
|
Schnullerbacke13
Germany1199 Posts
On January 21 2011 05:52 RoosterSamurai wrote: Or maybe you are actually wrong, and don't know what you're talking about, and Terran is not actually OP. Thanks for sharing your arguments =P. Any fact from real world indicating T is not OP epecially at pro level ? | ||
|
pzea469
United States1520 Posts
ALL THAT BEING SAID: Player skill can get you out of any imbalance. Maybe you gotta work a little harder, but if you practice hard you can overcome all of it. Maybe If I had been more careful with stalker positioning in my main or something, drops wouldn't succeed as much. Maybe If forcefielded better, or macroed harder or something I could come out ahead more often. So who knows. Complaining can be fun but I won't stop playing because of it. | ||
|
Deadlyfish
Denmark1980 Posts
On January 21 2011 06:02 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: Thanks for sharing your arguments =P. Any fact from real world indicating T is not OP epecially at pro level ? Wait, are you asking if there is anything that suggets that terran isnt OP? Anything at all? Nah man, Terran wins 100% of all games and tournaments, we have yet to see proof that terran isnt OP  I keep looking at this thread thinking that it'll get better or it will get closed, but it never does haha | ||
|
Chise
Japan507 Posts
On January 21 2011 06:00 branflakes14 wrote: What would happen if instead of either Droning hard or producing units hard, a Zerg player produced Drones from their Larva at the same rate a Terran/Protoss produces workers, and used the other Larva to produce units over time? Would the Zerg be more prepared for pushes while still having a similar economy to their opponent, even on one base? Zerg would lose, because Zerg units are not cost effective. | ||
|
Sonictonic
Sweden62 Posts
On January 21 2011 06:06 Chise wrote: Zerg would lose, because Zerg units are not cost effective. Yes, they are, what are you talking about? | ||
|
nam nam
Sweden4672 Posts
On January 21 2011 06:06 Chise wrote: Zerg would lose, because Zerg units are not cost effective. If anything blizzard should increase the spawn rate and the number of larva that are naturally spawned at hatcheries and possible compensate by nerfing the queens spawn larva function. In my head that would make it easier early game to produce units before you get multiple hatcheries up with queens. But what do I know.  | ||
|
Jermstuddog
United States2231 Posts
On January 21 2011 06:06 Chise wrote: Zerg would lose, because Zerg units are not cost effective. Zerg would also slowly fall farther and farther behind in worker count. -1 for the expo hatch, -1 for the pool, -1 for the extractor. You're already 3 workers behind and you haven't even build your first combat unit. | ||
|
Treemonkeys
United States2082 Posts
On January 21 2011 06:00 branflakes14 wrote: What would happen if instead of either Droning hard or producing units hard, a Zerg player produced Drones from their Larva at the same rate a Terran/Protoss produces workers, and used the other Larva to produce units over time? Would the Zerg be more prepared for pushes while still having a similar economy to their opponent, even on one base? You need the extra hatch anyways for production, the only advatage to placing it in base is that it is easier to defend. Zerg also has very gas heavy units, so you need the extra gas from the natural. You have to consider that even with getting gas from the natural, zerg has the least cost effective units. This is only much more true off one base, because the only way to dump minerals is with zerglings and spine crawlers. Basically zerg sits on one base, terran sits on one base. Terran masses up a cost effective army that can attack at any time, zerg masses of a less cost effective army that becomes further less cost effective if they try to attack because of melee and short range. So zerg sits there and does nothing or defends, terran masses up a big enough army until they can take their natural with no risk, and zerg auto loses. The only viable one basing you can do as zerg are baneling busts, roach all ins, or nydus all ins. If any of these fail, you might as well quit the game. With a baneling bust you have to suicide your units just to get through the wall and actually fight his army, if terran layers his wall this has no chance of sucess. With roach wall in terran only needs one bunker with marauders being repaired and it has no chance of success. If nydus is spotted it has no chance of sucess. If it isn't spotted it can still go either way, because terran will likely kill it before too many units get out, and then zerg is sitting on one base with the terran wise to his only method of attack. | ||
|
Soliduok
Canada222 Posts
If theres any top Random players out there willing to share this information it could help this debate greatly | ||
|
branflakes14
2082 Posts
On January 21 2011 06:06 Chise wrote: Zerg would lose, because Zerg units are not cost effective. Stalkers survive a 1 on 1 with a Roach with just 20 health, despite costing almost double, and 4 Speedlings beats a Zealot any day of the week even with Zealot micro to prevent a surround. And as for Terran, Zerglings and Roaches are MORE than enough to hold off a stim MM push. Really. I'm in the unit test map right now, and 10 Speedlings + 3 Roaches is beating 5 Marines and 3 Marauders (which actually costs more) even when the Terran units stim. I'm just attack moving of course, but for the extra minerals the Terran has spent on those Marauders, the Zerg could get another 6 Lings, which would tip the balance even further in his favour. In fact, I'll try it with those extra Lings now, and micro the Terran units. Haha, not even fucking close. How anyone can say Zerg units aren't cost effective is beyond me, especially when I wasn't even doing these units tests on creep and didn't use any Spine Crawlers. | ||
|
Roblin
Sweden948 Posts
On January 21 2011 05:51 AlBundy wrote: About Zerg I think that the standard builds (14 hatch, 14 pool, 14 hatch/15 pool, you name it) are getting a bit old and that's why Terran feel so comfortable early game. I think there is definitely a balance between the 1-base all-in builds and the 14/15 hatch builds. I don't see any reason why Zerg couldn't come up with BOs that allows pressure, expanding, mid-game transitions etc. please for the love of god mister AlBundy, go out on ladder, play zerg, evolve a build or strategy that allows you to put pressure (as in serious pressure (that directly wins you games at least 10 % of the time on equal skill)) in the early game on a non-zerg opponent while having an equal or greater economy than said opponent at all times during the game, while being flexible enough to instantly defend any all-in or cheese. when you have done this, please, tell me about it! because I have given up hope on an aggressive non all-in for zerg. as a matter of fact, Listen up TL community! all zerg players out there! I give you a challenge! evolve a build or strategy that satisfies the above conditions, and make a thread about it! and if you find that this is impossible, make a thread detailing (down to everything) exactly why you can state that that is true by only using valid facts that can be measured or known! (ex: timings, build times, training times, larvae spawn etc.) p.s. Suddenly. Motivation. | ||
|
Coutcha
Canada519 Posts
On January 21 2011 06:17 branflakes14 wrote: Stalkers survive a 1 on 1 with a Roach with just 20 health, despite costing almost double, and 4 Speedlings beats a Zealot any day of the week even with Zealot micro to prevent a surround. And as for Terran, Zerglings and Roaches are MORE than enough to hold off a stim MM push. Really. I'm in the unit test map right now, and 10 Speedlings + 3 Roaches is beating 5 Marines and 3 Marauders (which actually costs more) even when the Terran units stim. I'm just attack moving of course, but for the extra minerals the Terran has spent on those Marauders, the Zerg could get another 6 Lings, which would tip the balance even further in his favour. In fact, I'll try it with those extra Lings now, and micro the Terran units. Haha, not even fucking close. How anyone can say Zerg units aren't cost effective is beyond me, especially when I wasn't even doing these units tests on creep and didn't use any Spine Crawlers. use micro.... and real army number try 15 marine with stim vs zerling marine will pwn them.... same maro pwn roach and protoss can use ff to kill z unit without many loss... | ||
|
giuocob
United States149 Posts
| ||
| ||
.
