|
Hey guys. I'm a 3.2-3.4k level masters zerg player thats switching to terran since the new patch (not related to any balance changes at all). I've played all 3 races quite a lot since beta, in fact terran is probably my most played race so I'd like to think I'm not that bias.
I find that zerg is harder to play at high levels than terran or protoss. What I mean is that it takes more hard work and practice and requires more in depth decision making than any other race. The problem that I see is that in order for top zerg players or even high master zerg players to win, they need to produce as many drones as possible without dieing. That means that they need constant scouting information to judge how many drones can be made, and they need to be able to accurately determine how many units are needed to hold off certain armies. Or they can go all in with banelings vs terran but I think that the popularity of those builds could be because terrans have been getting lazy and assuming that all zergs are macro style players.
Anyway the bottom line is this: Zerg players have to judge exactly how many drones they can make without dieing. Every other race has much less complicated decisions to make. If a protoss or terran want to build a stronger economy the decision is simple... expand... You almost never see a protoss or terran player cutting workers, they don't really face a tradeoff between units and workers because the two units aren't competing for build time. So zerg players are carefully balancing military and economy while terran and protoss players have simple decisions of expanding or not.
If any changes were made to make zerg less difficult in this regard, zerg would become overpowered because top players can play zerg optimally. I'm not saying zerg is underpowered, I just think its harder to master. I'm a player who is competitive and fairly skilled, but I don't have a lot of time to play so whats the incentive for me to play zerg when I can improve more quickly as terran or protoss without as much demand for practice and understanding of the game?
What are your opinions?
|
i dont know. i am not on top. neither are most of people who are going to reply. it kinda feels a little harder when i spawn as zerg, but could as well be just me.
I dont think you can say for sure what race is the hardest. ever
|
I've heard people make this argument in both SC2 and BW. I think it's that people find the race's mechanics so different from the other two. I don't think they're any harder, and as a Zerg player since like 2000, I find the other 2 races much harder to play.
|
Zerg is not the hardest, but it needs experiance, which comes from playing alot.
Like MC playing strong with FF, if you don't know how to prevent that you lose, but if you know what can be done, obviously you will survive and be ahead.
Zerg is so much more rewarding.
|
It's not really the case of zerg being harder than the other races. I never played BW and started SC2 after it was released. i started out with zerg thinking they were cool and i reached diamond and started playing masters with the race. however, i am now switching to terran and frankly i feel T is more difficult. once you get the mechanics for each race down its not really that difficult. they all have their own unique challenges.
|
Zerg is the hardest definitely up til high masters. I'm not sure beyond that, as terran and protoss players start needing to have good decision making as well if they are not doing some build order all in.
Up till high masters, protoss or terran can just do a set build order with a very high win %. Hardly any skill whatsoever yet they can easily reach high masters with an array of no-skill set build orders (forge FE --> 5 gate, 1 zealot 2 sentry expand --> 7:15 DTs, 2 base VR collosus 200/200, etc). Hardly any skill, will slay the majority of masters players consistently.
|
It depends what you consider "hard to play"
A lot of lower level terran and protoss try to just 2 rax banshee or 4 gate every game expecting it to work. Zerg players don't really have an equivalent "all-in" type of build. We used to in beta when roach was overpowered, but not anymore.
I would argue that playing zerg is not harder then protoss or terran as long as you get used to playing more safe builds with those 2 races like zerg has to do. That's not to say those builds should never be used, but if 90% of your games are using a 1 base play build, you might want to consider thinking about if that's actually making you good or just getting you wins.
|
I think really the hardest part of zerg in the game is their lack of 'easy' scouting from about minute 2 onward until they hit lair tech.
As such every decision a zerg makes is much harder to make then their terran or toss counterparts, mostly because the early game match up of ZvP or ZvT is dictated by the protoss or terran....zerg really doesn't dictate where the match up goes until the mid game.
All this of course assuming you don't all in...I find if Terran or Protoss play passively early in the game it doesn't feel overly difficult, really I'm only fearing for my life scurrying around trying to get any info I can when they 1 base early in the game and try to prevent my scouting...which is the timing I think zerg is actually truly 'hard'.
Past minute 7 or 8 assuming there wasn't a mass all in by terran, toss, or zerg I think any of the three races are equally difficult.
|
Definitely not true. Zerg is harder mechanics-wise with creep spread and larva inject as compared to just mule or chronoboost but at very high level. All 3 takes extremely high skill. Have you seen MC's forcefields? They are perfect and he lays down like 10 of them in 2 secs. Think of decision that goes into it. As a toss player, unless it is just the standard ramp block. You have to know how much units to cut. Where to cut the units to use the least FFs? When to pressure. This is huge everyone knows if you let zerg drone, zerg will just outmacro you. If you move out too early, zerg might mass ling and kill your initial force and take the map. If you move out too late, zerg already droned up and is one base ahead of you.
|
I used to play low diamond toss in the beta and before masters was up, then switched to zerg. I'd definitely say that the biggest change is that zerg can't just create a game plan and follow it, in the same sense that terran and toss can. Need a lot more game sense.
|
On March 23 2011 21:33 Zorkmid wrote:
I've heard people make this argument in both SC2 and BW. I think it's that people find the race's mechanics so different from the other two. I don't think they're any harder, and as a Zerg player since like 2000, I find the other 2 races much harder to play.
absolutely agreed. I am a Zerg player starting from SC1 too, the mechanics are way so different from T and P. I can never figure out how to play T well
|
I don't think it's harderst to play with zerg, it's just hardest to win ^^
|
the only thing that makes zerg harder mechanic wise is not missing injects and spreading creep
other than that, the rest of the difficulties come from a balance standpoint (if there are any, at all)
|
Of course it is the hardest race to play, It requires fast APM, quick decisions and has very little power to be aggressive and be safe at the same time. Although us zergs require fast reaction and decisions to adjust to our opponents actions and because zerg has less options and is not the "dictator" in the matches it makes it more difficult.
|
Yepp, zerg is the hardest. ofc
|
Zerg is the hardest to get used to and the hardest to get really good at, which corresponds to it being the hardest to play. However, this really only applies to low levels and I feel that it is equally tough to play all races at the top levels of SC (1 and 2). Also, zerg has the an equal, if not the most, potential out of the three races which really levels of the playing field.
|
Played both Protoss and Zerg up to the high diamond levels, so I can only speak for those. In my experience Zerg has:
Harder macro mechanics
Harder time knowing what decisions to make
Easier micro
|
The difference between a mediocre zerg and a top zerg is incredibly subtle and incredibly huge, while with the other two races it's fairly straight forward to see where you're going wrong, usually unit composition or expansion timing, with zerg getting the correct mix of droning and units not only involves knowing a vast array of opponent timings, but also differentiating between a push and a prod that's intended for you to over produce units. It's such an incredibly unintuitive and nebulous problem that it requires a markedly different mindset, it's the reason why zerg players think the best zerg players are so much better than the best P and T players, but I don't think they can really be compared, the top P and T players are best at managing the specifics of their race which are probably markedly different from each other too.
|
The droning goes both ways. It's extremely hard for Terran especially to know just how many units the Zerg is making at all times, and when it's actually safe to move out and apply pressure not get completely over-run by speedlings or banelings early game.
Positioning is also extremely important, and with very immobile units it can be very difficult to get into correct position in TvZ while also not having to worry about Muta harass. Dealing with muta harass takes a huge ammount of good reaction time and decision making.,
|
Another one of these threads, pretty sure this has been discussed to death many, many times over on TL.
|
Zerg doesnt have the equivalent of 4gate or banshee/stim pushes. And early game is unstable due to most people knowing how to deny scouting overlords.
Early game zerg is harder. Past the early game its equal.
|
I don't actually know I've been playing zerg since the beta of SC2 (played Protoss in SC1) and I find it easier to play well than Protoss / Terran.
I'm not bad at Protoss but seriously I suck so hard as Terran haha. I think if you get used to Zerg mechanics it's not so bad.
All races aren't hard to play in SC2 but they're hard to play properly.
On March 23 2011 22:11 Sniffy wrote:
Zerg doesnt have the equivalent of 4gate or banshee/stim pushes. And early game is unstable due to most people knowing how to deny scouting overlords.
Early game zerg is harder. Past the early game its equal.
Actually there are some ling + roach all ins that you can do that have similar timings and are REALLY hard to stop.
|
I think that the macro and gameplay are quite different than the two other races and that is what makes people think it is a hard race to play. Sure it seems hard but once you get those things down and understand them, you can begin to learn the race in more depth. Zerg does require good timing as well whereas I think the other two races are slightly more forgiving (not saying you can just A-move at any point with P or T).
|
On March 23 2011 21:54 xbankx wrote:
Definitely not true. Zerg is harder mechanics-wise with creep spread and larva inject as compared to just mule or chronoboost but at very high level.
lol. so tired of hearing flawed mechanics comparisons. zerg have creep and and injections, terran has mules, is that it? no it's not. how about producing all units, including supply from one centralised location, needing only one tech structure? that's a harder mechanic as well? stop comparing, it's pointless.
|
On March 23 2011 22:11 Maynarde wrote:
Actually there are some ling + roach all ins that you can do that have similar timings and are REALLY hard to stop.
Are they as reliable as 4gate/stim? Ive never tried that stuff
|
i would say zerg is the race that has the least forgiving of mistakes where even small decision/micro mistakes could lead to loosing
|
On March 23 2011 22:16 Sniffy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 22:11 Maynarde wrote:
Actually there are some ling + roach all ins that you can do that have similar timings and are REALLY hard to stop. Are they as reliable as 4gate/stim? Ive never tried that stuff
Nah, but like 4 gates and stim rushes they're pretty much an insta win against a fast expand.
Should check it out man, there's a thread on it I think.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=190292
|
On March 23 2011 21:26 McDaniels92 wrote:
Hey guys. I'm a 3.2-3.4k level masters zerg player thats switching to terran since the new patch (not related to any balance changes at all). I've played all 3 races quite a lot since beta, in fact terran is probably my most played race so I'd like to think I'm not that bias.
I find that zerg is harder to play at high levels than terran or protoss. What I mean is that it takes more hard work and practice and requires more in depth decision making than any other race. The problem that I see is that in order for top zerg players or even high master zerg players to win, they need to produce as many drones as possible without dieing. That means that they need constant scouting information to judge how many drones can be made, and they need to be able to accurately determine how many units are needed to hold off certain armies. Or they can go all in with banelings vs terran but I think that the popularity of those builds could be because terrans have been getting lazy and assuming that all zergs are macro style players.
Anyway the bottom line is this: Zerg players have to judge exactly how many drones they can make without dieing. Every other race has much less complicated decisions to make. If a protoss or terran want to build a stronger economy the decision is simple... expand... You almost never see a protoss or terran player cutting workers, they don't really face a tradeoff between units and workers because the two units aren't competing for build time. So zerg players are carefully balancing military and economy while terran and protoss players have simple decisions of expanding or not.
If any changes were made to make zerg less difficult in this regard, zerg would become overpowered because top players can play zerg optimally. I'm not saying zerg is underpowered, I just think its harder to master. I'm a player who is competitive and fairly skilled, but I don't have a lot of time to play so whats the incentive for me to play zerg when I can improve more quickly as terran or protoss without as much demand for practice and understanding of the game?
What are your opinions?
I dont get the whole unit vs drone production thing. If anything its a huge help for zerg players. You can build a drone or two every time your larva pops and pump out some army everytime as well, just like a terran or protoss would do.
On the other hand you can get very good economi quickly with some drone pumping if you feel your safe (like if you just traded army with the opponent).
I would think in the lower levels this is harder for people to do well, but in the higher levels it seems just as good and logical as t/p.
|
Zerg is the most difficult race to play in the sense that it's very unforgiving. It's very very difficult to scout any T or P after your initial overlord or drone, and if you guess wrong within the first 10 minutes, you lose automatically. This incites massive amounts of rage and QQ to many Z players.
It's a much more conceptually difficult race to play as well. Knowing when to squeeze in extra drones is critical, which someone like NesTea knows very well. I forget which game it was in GSL Season 2, but he played a ZvT in which he was 2 rax allined with scv's (still a pretty common allin), and even after losing a ton of drones, he had an 8 worker advantage.
Personal experience: I was edging onto the master league as Terran, playing against master players and going positive W/L. However, I hated Terran's late game weaknesses, since I play mostly a style from BW that entails very heavy macro. I switched to Zerg about a month ago, and am still below 2000 points in diamond.
The reason that Z incites so much rage on forums and streams is how easy it is to lose to absolutely horrible players if you make one early game scouting mistake.
|
As a zerg player, i honestly feel like it's more of a hump to overcome, because at the very top level, all players are constantly gleaning scouting information of all sorts, and know exactly where the opponent's army is and what it's doing. I think at a certain point, whichever's hardest to master doesn't so much come into play as does overall balance of the matchup, and I think due to the last patch we've gotten even closer to that.
Freaking <333333333333 fungal now.
|
Yes.
User was warned for this post
|
Yes, you have to have higher APM to constantly be spreading creep, injecting larvae and poking with overlords around the opponents base as well as running lings to the front to see unit comp and/or tech structures. Then on top of that you are most vulnerable to all ins, and even when you scout them and know they are coming you can still easily lose. They cannot wall in and their early tier units are very weak and have no anti air until tier 2.
This is from 3400 masters zerg.
|
I think at a mid masters level, definately. You need twice the apm of your opponents to play your race properly. At this level where most people hover around the lower one hundred, you'd want a good 200 apm as zerg to properly spread creep, inject and control the map. I think this levels out when you get to the pro levels though, where everyone is that quick.
|
I believe that the margin of error as zerg is smaller compared to the other races. In BW, I felt the same for protoss (against zerg at least).
|
You'll never get a straight answer.
I think yes, but I play Zerg.
non-Zergs will most likely disagree.
|
Adding in a defensive/cloaked zerg unit will do wonders for the race,the larvae mechanic for Zerg is arguably it's best point, allowing fast tech switching for army composition and massive production capablity. Drone management is not the problem for zerg right now, too many of their units are just not great, i.e hydras.
|
On March 23 2011 22:25 Boundless wrote:
Zerg is the most difficult race to play in the sense that it's very unforgiving. It's very very difficult to scout any T or P after your initial overlord or drone, and if you guess wrong within the first 10 minutes, you lose automatically. This incites massive amounts of rage and QQ to many Z players.
This... and
The reason that Z incites so much rage on forums and streams is how easy it is to lose to absolutely horrible players if you make one early game scouting mistake.
this!
Plain truth.
|
But that is what makes zerg fun! More than the other races zerg needs to react which makes for lots of different games and stuff to be learnt.
|
Put it this way:
Zerg players will have to learn to how to understand the game to progress sooner than T or P players have to.
For example, a 3200 Master Zerg might understand how to react to limited scouting information and know more timings than a 3200 Toss or Terran.
However, it is even on a high level where everyone understands the game.
|
It was theorized in BW that if you could produce an AI that would play the game at 100% efficiency, then zerg would be the winner by far. The race had the most potential for higher APM and multitasking to matter.
Not sure if the same applies to SC2, but it could seem so.
|
i think every race has its hard parts and easy parts, and it depends on the players' preferences/skills which race suits him best.
|
On March 23 2011 22:14 rmAmnesiac wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 21:54 xbankx wrote:
Definitely not true. Zerg is harder mechanics-wise with creep spread and larva inject as compared to just mule or chronoboost but at very high level.
lol. so tired of hearing flawed mechanics comparisons. zerg have creep and and injections, terran has mules, is that it? no it's not. how about producing all units, including supply from one centralised location, needing only one tech structure? that's a harder mechanic as well? stop comparing, it's pointless.
Have you tried to do creep spread+larva inject? It is very hard. I play as random when I 2v2 and zerg creep spread+larva inject is very hard to keep up with. I am not saying any one of the special abilities is better than the other special abilities but comparing the apm require to keep up with using each skill is very reasonable.
|
On March 23 2011 22:24 mskaa wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 21:26 McDaniels92 wrote:
Hey guys. I'm a 3.2-3.4k level masters zerg player thats switching to terran since the new patch (not related to any balance changes at all). I've played all 3 races quite a lot since beta, in fact terran is probably my most played race so I'd like to think I'm not that bias.
I find that zerg is harder to play at high levels than terran or protoss. What I mean is that it takes more hard work and practice and requires more in depth decision making than any other race. The problem that I see is that in order for top zerg players or even high master zerg players to win, they need to produce as many drones as possible without dieing. That means that they need constant scouting information to judge how many drones can be made, and they need to be able to accurately determine how many units are needed to hold off certain armies. Or they can go all in with banelings vs terran but I think that the popularity of those builds could be because terrans have been getting lazy and assuming that all zergs are macro style players.
Anyway the bottom line is this: Zerg players have to judge exactly how many drones they can make without dieing. Every other race has much less complicated decisions to make. If a protoss or terran want to build a stronger economy the decision is simple... expand... You almost never see a protoss or terran player cutting workers, they don't really face a tradeoff between units and workers because the two units aren't competing for build time. So zerg players are carefully balancing military and economy while terran and protoss players have simple decisions of expanding or not.
If any changes were made to make zerg less difficult in this regard, zerg would become overpowered because top players can play zerg optimally. I'm not saying zerg is underpowered, I just think its harder to master. I'm a player who is competitive and fairly skilled, but I don't have a lot of time to play so whats the incentive for me to play zerg when I can improve more quickly as terran or protoss without as much demand for practice and understanding of the game?
What are your opinions? I dont get the whole unit vs drone production thing. If anything its a huge help for zerg players. You can build a drone or two every time your larva pops and pump out some army everytime as well, just like a terran or protoss would do. On the other hand you can get very good economi quickly with some drone pumping if you feel your safe (like if you just traded army with the opponent). I would think in the lower levels this is harder for people to do well, but in the higher levels it seems just as good and logical as t/p.
Frankly, because we can't build drones and units together at roughly equal rates and expect to be even with a toss or protoss, or even a zerg that knows better.
If terran or toss could mass produce workers, it would be optimal to scout for possible attacks and mass workers until stauration with the minimum defence neccesary. In an economic game it's all about getting those economies.
Every unit zerg makes before saturation is literally slowing their eco in a game where eco is #1. Obviously zerg has to make units during a game, and if you overproduce you can still win, but the very best zerg players don't, and in 3 years (edit,hell now obviously too, but I mean in 3 years players will have to be spot on), no one who wants to consider them a serious zerg player will be able to (just as the skill levels for t and p will rise)
|
Yah I wouldnt say zerg is the hardest at the higher levels, but at the lowers levels yes.
|
at the highest level.. im pretty sure its not the race that is holding you back, then your personal mechanics and decision making.
|
Russian Federation304 Posts
Z is hard to play on a high lvl, but not at top lvl...
|
Hardest to master, but I don't think they are the hardest to win with, you certainly don't have to master the race (or play close to perfect) to be able to win the majority of your game.
I mean, having a look at Naniwas "leaked patch notes", it had some intersting statistics, like Zerg having a 55% win ratio against Protoss (on average), even though the match up is supposedly tilted towards Protoss...
|
On March 23 2011 22:58 Dommk wrote:
Hardest to master, but I don't think they are the hardest to win with, you certainly don't have to master the race (or play close to perfect) to be able to win the majority of your game.
I mean, having a look at Naniwas "leaked patch notes", it had some intersting statistics, like Zerg having a 55% win ratio against Protoss (on average), even though the match up is supposedly tilted towards Protoss...
The average win percentages on ladder are not as interesting as what's happening on the top.
|
It's definitively the easiest race to lose with. It has the weakest early game defense and it's the hardest race to scout with. It's also the most susceptible to cheese, thus making it hard to play safe. With P or T, you can often just do your own thing the first 5-10 minutes of the game and concentrate on executing your build.
Mid and late game if you managed to scout, drone and spread creep it's not that much harder though.
|
On March 23 2011 23:09 nkr wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 22:58 Dommk wrote:
Hardest to master, but I don't think they are the hardest to win with, you certainly don't have to master the race (or play close to perfect) to be able to win the majority of your game.
I mean, having a look at Naniwas "leaked patch notes", it had some intersting statistics, like Zerg having a 55% win ratio against Protoss (on average), even though the match up is supposedly tilted towards Protoss... The average win percentages on ladder are not as interesting as what's happening on the top.
and what are the win percentages at the top? Take away MC, and I bet zerg has a 55% or more vs Protoss in the past 3 GSL events (code s, code a, GSTL2)
|
I think Zerg has the highest skill window, but arguably isn't the hardest race to master. Yes, constant Larva Injects, Creep Tumor Production, OV scouting, and Ling Scouting are APM intensive, but it's really about repetition (like most other things in life) and learning the timings of the mechanics. By timings of the mechanics, I mean: how long until you can make another Creep tumor; how long until it's time for the next larva inject; how long until you need to make Overlords (and how many); when should you expand?
What can be difficult for Zerg players is properly reacting to what your opponent is doing, and imo there isn't a more chaotic match-up than ZvZ. Unit comps can change so quickly that constant scouting is the second-most important task, next to proper macro.
I would argue that Zerg is the hardest race to get accustomed to, and since OP seems to play all 3 races, I'm guessing that the mechanics for Zerg do not match his play-style. I would also argue that Protoss (now more than ever) is the hardest of the 3 races to truly master.
|
Id prefer to say it's the race that is easiest to lose with.
|
On March 23 2011 22:58 Dommk wrote:
I mean, having a look at Naniwas "leaked patch notes", it had some intersting statistics, like Zerg having a 55% win ratio against Protoss (on average), even though the match up is supposedly tilted towards Protoss...
Link pls =)
Which race is the hardest to play solely depends on the player imo. Zerg needs more apm, but a player whose mechanics are his greatest strength will have an easier time learning to play Z than P for example.
I'm a random player whose mechanics are severely lacking(high diamond atm) and even though I played the most games with Z, are a Zerg at heart <3 and understand the race and the matchups the best in my opinion(well, I just don't have a clue how to play T or P properly :p) I win more games as Toss, because Toss is really easy mechanically compared to Z(more difficult in other areas tho) and fits myself better.
|
If 3300 masters is high level, then no. They are no harder than other races, they're just different. I'm actually much more comfortable with zerg macro mechanics than I am with protoss even though I've played significantly more games as toss.
But I don't doubt that some people find it really hard to play zerg. I find terran damn near impossible to play. Some styles just suit people better than others.
Zerg needs more apm
This is btw one of the most stupid myths that seems to plague this forum. I'm a fairly low apm masters player and I have no problems playing zerg.
|
I'll concede that zerg has the steepest learning/mastery curve, yes, but more difficult once mastered? Nope. Sure there are injects to worry about, but pros who have mastered zerg treat injects as just a routine action they go through, like chronoboosts and mules, so it's even on that field.
Then there's creep spread, but very rarely does creep cause a win/lose situation for a game in my observation. And since all zerg units are produced at one structure, I'd say that makes up for having to worry about spread, whereas other races use the time they don't have to spread creep ensuring that they are producing units at all their production sturctures.
As for scouting... I'd go so far as to say it's even harder for toss than zerg to scout, particularly early game, pre-observers but post-speedlings.
As much as zerg likes to cry imba, I think bliz has done a good job thus far on ensuring that all three races are equally "hard" to use at a master level.
|
outside of races obviously beeing played different imho:
Z=T skill wise with P beeing abit easier in general cause of how they dictate the game in all matchups, have mostly easier mechanics requirement and army control (say what you want, controling a stalker/collosus ball is not hard) and can follow a set buildorder/plan the easiest with the most powerful and diverse allins.
but dont hate me for that. i admit that i play T/Z in ladder and never really liked sc2 toss as a race/mechanics :>
|
On March 23 2011 23:26 Rob28 wrote:
I'll concede that zerg has the steepest learning/mastery curve, yes, but more difficult once mastered? Nope. Sure there are injects to worry about, but pros who have mastered zerg treat injects as just a routine action they go through, like chronoboosts and mules, so it's even on that field.
Then there's creep spread, but very rarely does creep cause a win/lose situation for a game in my observation. And since all zerg units are produced at one structure, I'd say that makes up for having to worry about spread, whereas other races use the time they don't have to spread creep ensuring that they are producing units at all their production sturctures.
As for scouting... I'd go so far as to say it's even harder for toss than zerg to scout, particularly early game, pre-observers but post-speedlings.
As much as zerg likes to cry imba, I think bliz has done a good job thus far on ensuring that all three races are equally "hard" to use at a master level.
Mules and to a largely lesser extent chronoboosts don't punish you if you are not dead even on using them. Larvae inject you will not catch back up on if you were 5 seconds late every single time it is a much less forgiving mechanic.
Creep is needed! And as a zerg player there is nothing more frustrating than me spreading creep over the entire map and then an observer comes in and he spends 15 seconds killing 15 minutes of creep spread I did.
I'd say protoss has better scouting until the late game when i have overlords all over and decent creep spread. Early game scouting is so easy i dont even have a wall and hallucinate, observers, and phoenixes are amazing scouts.
We zergs cry imba because it is frustrating how hard we work to get rushed by strong builds. It feels like I have to defend defend defend defend till i get mutas to harass then i defend some more then i can finally fight back when i have 5 bases max upgrades and tons of brood lords
|
On March 23 2011 22:22 Maynarde wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 22:16 Sniffy wrote:On March 23 2011 22:11 Maynarde wrote:
Actually there are some ling + roach all ins that you can do that have similar timings and are REALLY hard to stop. Are they as reliable as 4gate/stim? Ive never tried that stuff Nah, but like 4 gates and stim rushes they're pretty much an insta win against a fast expand. Should check it out man, there's a thread on it I think. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=190292
those rushes are strong against rine or rine/hellion expands because most terrans dont realize that pressuring the zerg economy and force them to go roaches will always bear a chance that zerg just decides to push; against protoss expands its way harder unless the protoss does not get 2-3 cannons
ling roach rushes highly depend on maps - while you can always do a 4 gate everywhere a ling/roach rush is not an option on large 2 player maps and everything but close position on 4 player maps because roach reinforcements will come too late
|
The only problem I see with zerg, that makes them a bit harder to play, is there inability to scout and to play agressive in the early game.
There is for me a clear proof that zerg were not design to be agressive early: their first 3 units have speed upgrades, and two of the three got that upgrade in T2.
Scout is the same. The first 7-10 minute are always shaky because of that, unless you all in or overproduce battle units (and underproduce drone by doing so).
Zerg needs more apm
This is btw one of the most stupid myths that seems to plague this forum. I'm a fairly low apm masters player and I have no problems playing zerg.
Actually, this is not dumb at all. Zerg do not need more apm, they have more apm. Producing mass cheap units : pretty easy to understand why your apm goes higher as a zerg. Just watch a replay, and look at a player apm when he morph a bunch of baneling.
|
On March 23 2011 21:37 freetgy wrote:
Zerg is not the hardest, but it needs experiance, which comes from playing alot.
Like MC playing strong with FF, if you don't know how to prevent that you lose, but if you know what can be done, obviously you will survive and be ahead.
Zerg is so much more rewarding.
>implying its not way harder to deal with ff as zerg than spamming them as protoss.
|
On March 23 2011 23:26 Rob28 wrote:
I'll concede that zerg has the steepest learning/mastery curve, yes, but more difficult once mastered? Nope. Sure there are injects to worry about, but pros who have mastered zerg treat injects as just a routine action they go through, like chronoboosts and mules, so it's even on that field.
If you miss a larva inject youll get punished hard and might even lose the game if its a tense situation.
If you miss a mule or chrono boost - who cares?
|
On March 23 2011 23:26 Rob28 wrote:
Then there's creep spread, but very rarely does creep cause a win/lose situation for a game in my observation. And since all zerg units are produced at one structure, I'd say that makes up for having to worry about spread, whereas other races use the time they don't have to spread creep ensuring that they are producing units at all their production sturctures.
Concerning unit training and keeping up with your max supply there is no difference in the needed apm. If anything Toss needs slightly less apm, because they tend to build units that cost more supply and therefore have to build less units.
It doesn't matter if a Z can produce everything from one structure, since you don't select a single structure to macro anyway, you use a hotkey to select it and guess what: P and T can put everything on one hotkey aswell and use tab to switch between the different facilities(or something like 4 raxes 5 facs 6 ports), while Z uses hatch hotkey+s again to build different units. It's basically the same.
The only thing that matters is that P and T have to build more facilities to have an equal production, which equals a little bit more apm needed.
|
On March 23 2011 23:57 Keula wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 21:37 freetgy wrote:
Zerg is not the hardest, but it needs experiance, which comes from playing alot.
Like MC playing strong with FF, if you don't know how to prevent that you lose, but if you know what can be done, obviously you will survive and be ahead.
Zerg is so much more rewarding. >implying its not way harder to deal with ff as zerg than spamming them as protoss.
Spamming indicates mindless button mashing to get the job done, MC's FF's are anything but mindless. He has beautiful control.... Of course that is completely off topic.
|
On March 24 2011 00:02 GreEny K wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 23:57 Keula wrote:On March 23 2011 21:37 freetgy wrote:
Zerg is not the hardest, but it needs experiance, which comes from playing alot.
Like MC playing strong with FF, if you don't know how to prevent that you lose, but if you know what can be done, obviously you will survive and be ahead.
Zerg is so much more rewarding. >implying its not way harder to deal with ff as zerg than spamming them as protoss. Spamming indicates mindless button mashing to get the job done, MC's FF's are anything but mindless. He has beautiful control.... Of course that is completely off topic.
its not like it would have mattered if he missplaced 1 or 2 (he even had energy left), especially in the finals vs july
|
On March 24 2011 00:00 clusen wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 23:26 Rob28 wrote:
Then there's creep spread, but very rarely does creep cause a win/lose situation for a game in my observation. And since all zerg units are produced at one structure, I'd say that makes up for having to worry about spread, whereas other races use the time they don't have to spread creep ensuring that they are producing units at all their production sturctures. It doesn't matter if a Z can produce everything from one structure, since you don't select a single structure to macro anyway, you use a hotkey to select it and guess what: P and T can put everything on one hotkey aswell and use tab to switch between the different facilities(or something like 4 raxes 5 facs 6 ports), while Z uses hatch hotkey+s again to build different units. It's basically the same. The only thing that matters is that P and T have to build more facilities to have an equal production, which equals a little bit more apm needed.
Cycling through tab and hotkeyed production from 3 different production buildings is just as APM intensive as spreading creep would be, so I personally believe the field is level. It takes three keystrokes to fill a zerg production cycle. Hell, even warping in units as toss requires spam-clicking the mouse holding shift, which is way more APM than 3 button clicks. Combine that with the APM needed to be building more sturctures, and you've got the semblance of equality among the three races.
|
On March 23 2011 23:59 Keula wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 23:26 Rob28 wrote:
I'll concede that zerg has the steepest learning/mastery curve, yes, but more difficult once mastered? Nope. Sure there are injects to worry about, but pros who have mastered zerg treat injects as just a routine action they go through, like chronoboosts and mules, so it's even on that field.
If you miss a larva inject youll get punished hard and might even lose the game if its a tense situation. If you miss a mule or chrono boost - who cares?
Uhhh anybody who's ever been 6 pooled or 7RR, that's who cares. It literally equals a loss to miss either in those situations.
Lategame, just as bad. Do you realize how tough it is to compete with a lategame zerg economy if you neglect boost or mules?
|
On March 23 2011 21:46 arbitrageur wrote:
Zerg is the hardest definitely up til high masters. I'm not sure beyond that, as terran and protoss players start needing to have good decision making as well if they are not doing some build order all in.
Up till high masters, protoss or terran can just do a set build order with a very high win %. Hardly any skill whatsoever yet they can easily reach high masters with an array of no-skill set build orders (forge FE --> 5 gate, 1 zealot 2 sentry expand --> 7:15 DTs, 2 base VR collosus 200/200, etc). Hardly any skill, will slay the majority of masters players consistently.
I've met zerg players that were in high masters that played 6 pools or baneling bust every single game - it's nothing a phenomenon exclusive to terran or protoss.
It's not that one race is harder to play than another, it's that all races demand slightly _different_ skills. So for example, if you are good at micro but suck at scouting and macro decision making, you'll find zerg more difficult to play than say terran. The situation might be the opposite though if you have different skills - it cannot be generalized.
I have played mostly zerg in bw and both terran and zerg in sc2 and i don't find either race easier to play - although they certainly play differently.
|
On March 24 2011 00:12 Rob28 wrote:
It takes three keystrokes to fill a zerg production cycle.
And it takes 2 for Terran in that case :p
|
On March 24 2011 00:15 clusen wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 00:12 Rob28 wrote:
It takes three keystrokes to fill a zerg production cycle. And it takes 2 for Terran in that case :p
For one type of sturcture, yes... if you want three barracks units in the time it takes the zerg to make a dozen...
|
On March 24 2011 00:17 Rob28 wrote:
For one type of sturcture, yes. If you want three barracks units in the time it takes the zerg to make a dozen...
You get as many as you have minerals/production capabilities, same as Z. And no, as Z you're not always waiting for spawn larvae to finish, for the most part you're using larvae when you can.
Only remaxing in the lategame is easier for Z, that's it. Which is something Z has to do more frequently than T or P, because the stuff dies so fast.
|
It's only harder to play in lower levels.
Once you're good, you'll have enough apm to inject, spread creep, macro, etc. Everything else comes from experience.
It's like in SC1 where Terran was the hardest race to play at the lower levels and Protoss was the easiest. Once you got to a high enough level, everything evened out.
|
I think some of you misinterpreted my post. I didn't even talk about mechanics. I think larva spits and creep spread is probably more mechanically demanding than anything the other two races have to do, but that isn't even the subject of this post.
To summarize what I'm trying to say: Zerg has to decide between drone production and unit production because the two unit types compete for build time (larva) whereas other races can build both at the same time without really ever having to sacrifice production of the other (except in extreme or all in situations) This means that zerg has to make more complex decisions and has to do so more frequently. Furthermore scouting information is more important for zerg than for any other race in my opinion because of the fact that zerg has to react to what they see by either droning or making units, if zerg produces drones when units are needed or produces units when your opponent is macroing, then you are left in a very very difficult situation.
Terran and protoss can produce units capable of defending their base and in many cases attacking their opponent while also not sacraficing the ability to survive into the late game. Zerg, however, sacrifices too much to make an early push such that any early zerg push feels like an all in because you know you likely wont have the ability to match your opponent in the late game unless you do significant damage with your push. Furthermore early zerg pushes are very weak against terran wall ins and protoss sentries, and that may very well be part of the problem.
TLDR:
Zerg has to constantly react to their opponent by producing drones or units at the right time, not choosing the right way can cost the game. Zerg needs constant scouting information otherwise you're simply hoping/gambling that you're making the right type of unit, and getting scouting information is arguably hardest for zerg. If protoss were in the same predicament I would say it would be hardest for toss because obs come out relatively late compared to scan/overlord sacs, but protoss is capable of making enough units to defend most pushes while also developing an economy capable of matching if not surpassing their opponents in the late game.
|
On March 23 2011 23:59 Keula wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 23:26 Rob28 wrote:
I'll concede that zerg has the steepest learning/mastery curve, yes, but more difficult once mastered? Nope. Sure there are injects to worry about, but pros who have mastered zerg treat injects as just a routine action they go through, like chronoboosts and mules, so it's even on that field.
If you miss a larva inject youll get punished hard and might even lose the game if its a tense situation. If you miss a mule or chrono boost - who cares?
If my orbital had an option to produce 4 units of my choosing simultaneously with a 40 second cooldown, I would not care if I am getting punished for not using it, because even if I slip sometimes, it's a way higher reward than mining 270 minerals faster over the next 90 seconds. Larva inject is a way more powerful macro mechanic and due to the fact that you can have more queens than hatcheries there is no tension between tumors, transfuse and inject. So not injecting is suboptimal. Imagine you could inject whenever you wanted.. no need for a macro hatch, because a queen gives you even more larva.
Also making a macro hatch is dirt cheap comparing to getting additional T/P production facilities when you compare the unit output to the investment.
For Zergs complaining about scouting options:
Zerg has the best units for map control and vision (spling and muta). There is a shortage of information about the setup of the opponent map. But apparently Zerg has the feeling, that scans magically reveal the complete map. A terran relying on scans too much gets behind in economy, because to get the tech a pre-lair Zerg is going for, two scans need to be thrown (main and expand). For all it's worth - give Zerg the option to forgo a larva inject for a scan. Zerg players will still complain about poor scouting ability.
(Though I really laughed about the toss whining about 'pre-observer' scouting)
|
Some of these ideas are fair, others off the mark. I mean with the recent patch the top Zerg spellcaster (the Infestor) got crowned as the new champion of the swarm. I think it should take Kerrigan's place as leader.
I wouldn't say Zerg is "harder" to play, but it is very different than P or T. Z seems to be all about positioning. P seems to be more spell control and army comp, and T seems to be "awww whatever, I'll just make marines and maybe abuse the maps with my tanks." and "O wait, did I forget to SCV for a while... no problem; my mule can bring in 5x what your drone or probe can"
|
On March 23 2011 23:50 WhiteDog wrote:The only problem I see with zerg, that makes them a bit harder to play, is there inability to scout and to play agressive in the early game. There is for me a clear proof that zerg were not design to be agressive early: their first 3 units have speed upgrades, and two of the three got that upgrade in T2. Scout is the same. The first 7-10 minute are always shaky because of that, unless you all in or overproduce battle units (and underproduce drone by doing so). Show nested quote +Zerg needs more apm
This is btw one of the most stupid myths that seems to plague this forum. I'm a fairly low apm masters player and I have no problems playing zerg. Actually, this is not dumb at all. Zerg do not need more apm, they have more apm. Producing mass cheap units : pretty easy to understand why your apm goes higher as a zerg. Just watch a replay, and look at a player apm when he morph a bunch of baneling.
I know that zerg players on ladder generally seem to have higher apm. It's actually quite a noticeble trend when I look at my replays that zerg > terran/protoss in terms of the average apm. But that doesn't mean they actually need it. A lot of it is just early game spam anyway and it often looks like zerg players feel they need to have super-high apm, when they don't.
|
I'd say yes, but its very subjective and depends a lot on preference.
If you look at piqliq's run with all the races, he dominated the top of the ladder with abusive play as protoss, switched to terran and still dominated, switched to zerg for a bit and dropped to below top 100. It could be his style though.
|
On March 23 2011 23:59 Keula wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 23:26 Rob28 wrote:
I'll concede that zerg has the steepest learning/mastery curve, yes, but more difficult once mastered? Nope. Sure there are injects to worry about, but pros who have mastered zerg treat injects as just a routine action they go through, like chronoboosts and mules, so it's even on that field.
If you miss a larva inject youll get punished hard and might even lose the game if its a tense situation. If you miss a mule or chrono boost - who cares?
1 SCV takes 17 seconds to build, 2 takes 34 and 3 takes 51s. To optimize the resource, you have to remember to create a SCV every 17s, while with Zerg, you can forget to create drone for 10s, and can still pop out 3 drones in the next 17s. Another example, it takes 45s to build a tank, 180s to build 4 tanks, with Zerg, you can inject larva which takes 45s, and then build 4 tanks at the same time in 45s. So in another sense, Zerg's production is more forgiving..
A lot of people complain about mules, but if you look at it this way: a mules can only harvest max 300 minerals in 90s, which equal to 6 workers mining in 50s. So if the opponent has 6 more workers than you, the mules only help Terran to catch up the eco for 50s, that's it, after the 51th second, Terran will be behind greatly again. How much T is behind? In 40s when the mules die, Terran is behind 240 mineral which is almost another mules. And believe me, Zerg very often has 6+ more workers than Terran. If the MULES were to be taken out of the game, Terran would need a serious mechanic to catch up with Z and P in the eco war (reactor cc?)
I admit that Zerg is the hard race to play (for me), not because of mechanic, but because of the unit design itself and I don't play Zerg very much. When I play Zerg in 4v4 for fun, I hardly miss any injection because I get used to 45s waiting for the tanks to come out. Compared to Terran which have a lot of units coming out from lots of buildings and have different build time. It's much harder to optimize and build units constantly.
|
I have made post similar to the OP as well and I agree 100% even as a protoss player I cant argue that there are simply more mechanics that yeild greater importance
then the other races
|
Zerg is the best and/or easiest race to play.
Just check how many top 200 Zerg players there are, the theoretical number should be 20% (the overall ratio of zerg players on ladder).
You can also check this for all the leagues... as the league gets higher the ratio of Zergs get higher...
2 possibilities : Zerg players are better, Zerg race is easier/better.
|
Build a hatch, its same as two racks in cost but will help you with macro. Zerg is not harder at all and I've played all three races. It is different though
|
I should add, I don't see being able to choose between workers or army as a detrimental thing. There are times when I wish my nexus could release 8 probes simultaneously, and there are times when I wish my barracks could produce a dozen units at once. But they can't, and that's part of playing the race you choose.
|
On March 24 2011 00:25 McDaniels92 wrote:
I think some of you misinterpreted my post. I didn't even talk about mechanics. I think larva spits and creep spread is probably more mechanically demanding than anything the other two races have to do, but that isn't even the subject of this post.
To summarize what I'm trying to say: Zerg has to decide between drone production and unit production because the two unit types compete for build time (larva) whereas other races can build both at the same time without really ever having to sacrifice production of the other (except in extreme or all in situations) This means that zerg has to make more complex decisions and has to do so more frequently. Furthermore scouting information is more important for zerg than for any other race in my opinion because of the fact that zerg has to react to what they see by either droning or making units, if zerg produces drones when units are needed or produces units when your opponent is macroing, then you are left in a very very difficult situation.
Terran and protoss can produce units capable of defending their base and in many cases attacking their opponent while also not sacraficing the ability to survive into the late game. Zerg, however, sacrifices too much to make an early push such that any early zerg push feels like an all in because you know you likely wont have the ability to match your opponent in the late game unless you do significant damage with your push. Furthermore early zerg pushes are very weak against terran wall ins and protoss sentries, and that may very well be part of the problem.
TLDR:
Zerg has to constantly react to their opponent by producing drones or units at the right time, not choosing the right way can cost the game. Zerg needs constant scouting information otherwise you're simply hoping/gambling that you're making the right type of unit, and getting scouting information is arguably hardest for zerg. If protoss were in the same predicament I would say it would be hardest for toss because obs come out relatively late compared to scan/overlord sacs, but protoss is capable of making enough units to defend most pushes while also developing an economy capable of matching if not surpassing their opponents in the late game.
Hatch larva spawn rate > CC/nexus worker build rate -> use the auto spawn larva for drones and you are equal on economy
Inject = 4 larva every 50 second (assuming that you have a 10 second delay on average between injects) 4 units every 50 seconds equals 2 rax and a factory with similar macro.
Meaning you can produce a similar amount of units than 2-3 production facilities with your queen. Now if you make a macro hatch, you get the equivalent of around 5 production facilities for 550 minerals. A bargain! If you factor in your tech buildings, you will probably still be favored in terms of resources needed to increase unit production.
So your problem is actually the advantage of you race to produce the units/workers it needs due to it's flexible production? Imagine there is no larva inject and instead you have a larva maximum of 1 at each hatch which can only spawn a drone and each 'tech building' would produce larva that could only evolve into up to 4 different combat units.
|
On March 24 2011 00:33 TeWy wrote:
Zerg is the best and/or easiest race to play.
Just check how many top 200 Zerg players there are, the theoretical number should be 20% (the overall ratio of zerg players on ladder).
You can also check this for all the leagues... as the league gets higher the ratio of Zergs get higher...
2 possibilities : Zerg players are better, Zerg race is easier/better.
This makes me remember. There was one time in my division, I was rank 2, rank 1 and 3-10 were zerg players. I had mix feeling at that time hahaha.
|
Well if by playing you mean playing to win...then yes.
|
I don't think you can say that a race is more difficult to play at pro lvl, unless you are talking about balance.
Below pro lvl, I would not say that zerg is hardest to play, because I think that the T or P macro-oriented players are equally as deserving as Z players.
However, it is true that contrary to the other races there is no easy way to play zerg.
Most terran or protoss just copy 1 or 2 builds for each match up and win with a timing push. That is for sure easier than playing zerg.
|
I have played Terran and Zerg at 3k diamond level. From my Standpoint I think Terran is harder. I dont have a problem with scouting,larva injecting or spreading creep. I think it is a very simple mechanic, because long as you do that the game becomes much simpler.
As a terran if you miss just 3 seconds of building time on your raxs or tanks you are behind. Like said before in other posts a zerg can hit hislarva injects and produce 6 mutas but If I dont produce a thor for 5 seconds my next thor is behind 5 seconds and that adds up and becomes a big deal.
Spreading overlords is quite easy considering you always have them.
Once out of mid game a terran has to finish the game. The best thing we can do is Slow Push with mech/biomech. If we dont we get overrun unless we have built 6 extra cc's for scans on the way to there base cause we dont have any map vision other then scans. Xel nagas are always controlled by zerg and show the whole map combined with overlords.
I think removing the xel nagas would be help balance of the game. Or lowering the vision they grant overtime.
|
The difficulty of playing zerg doesn't have to be linear to player skill. Theoretically it's possible for one race to be harder at lower levels, get easier towards master and then harder again at pro level. I'm not sure that's the case but those kind of aspects might be something you want to look at when having these kind of discussions.
|
I can't speak to high levels of play. Judging just by my knowledge of the game, and what I have heard from top players, I feel like it is probably harder to play Zerg at the highest level.
But I can say for sure that it is harder at lower levels of play. Having played all races (more Zerg and Toss than Terran) I can state without doubt that there are many timings which are much easier to hit than to defend against.
I think it is harder mainly because of two things, one because it is difficult to scout as Zerg and yet so vital, and two because as Zerg you obviously can't make both units and drones in the same way other races are. It is easy to build a set of units and then say "attack" and harder to judge the exact composition and produce the right number of units to stop it without all-inning yourself.
Still I don't think the gap is nearly what a lot of people say it is. I can say from experience that Terran is more than just a-move, sieging tanks at the right time in the right position, stimming at the right time, it takes skill, it is not just "a move" like a lot of people say.
Funny, related pic I made (but don't take it too seriously it's just for lulz):
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ZVnVx.png)
On March 23 2011 22:10 DarthXX wrote:
Another one of these threads, pretty sure this has been discussed to death many, many times over on TL.
Pretty sure you contributed nothing, troll.
|
On March 24 2011 00:48 TheWarbler wrote:
I have played Terran and Zerg at 3k diamond level. From my Standpoint I think Terran is harder. I dont have a problem with scouting,larva injecting or spreading creep. I think it is a very simple mechanic, because long as you do that the game becomes much simpler.
As a terran if you miss just 3 seconds of building time on your raxs or tanks you are behind. Like said before in other posts a zerg can hit hislarva injects and produce 6 mutas but If I dont produce a thor for 5 seconds my next thor is behind 5 seconds and that adds up and becomes a big deal.
Spreading overlords is quite easy considering you always have them.
Once out of mid game a terran has to finish the game. The best thing we can do is Slow Push with mech/biomech. If we dont we get overrun unless we have built 6 extra cc's for scans on the way to there base cause we dont have any map vision other then scans. Xel nagas are always controlled by zerg and show the whole map combined with overlords.
I think removing the xel nagas would be help balance of the game. Or lowering the vision they grant overtime.
Again, hes not talking about the mechanics of the races. He is talking about theory and experience needed to play each respective race.
If you ever watch pro games, you would know Zerg does not always have the watch towers. People have even invented a name for this for Protoss and Terran called "shark mode"
|
Oh, I was under the impression the thread was about whether or not Z is the hardest race to play. Silly me....
just trying to contribute. I can't speak to the highest level of things, it would be foolish of me to try.
|
Zerg is also the race that's punished the most for mistakes, even small ones. Building a few too many drones, being late on an inject, etc.. are all things that can instantly lose you the game. Although similar things can cost Toss or Terran the game, it's to a much lesser degree.
The play style for Terran/Toss is a lot more intuitive for most players as well. Especially players coming from other RTS games, such as Wc3. At least that was true for me and I'd assume some other players.
|
This topic has been discussed to death since the days of broodwar. idra is really good at this, just watch his replays.
|
On March 24 2011 00:48 TheWarbler wrote:
I have played Terran and Zerg at 3k diamond level. From my Standpoint I think Terran is harder. I dont have a problem with scouting,larva injecting or spreading creep. I think it is a very simple mechanic, because long as you do that the game becomes much simpler.
As a terran if you miss just 3 seconds of building time on your raxs or tanks you are behind. Like said before in other posts a zerg can hit hislarva injects and produce 6 mutas but If I dont produce a thor for 5 seconds my next thor is behind 5 seconds and that adds up and becomes a big deal.
Spreading overlords is quite easy considering you always have them.
Once out of mid game a terran has to finish the game. The best thing we can do is Slow Push with mech/biomech. If we dont we get overrun unless we have built 6 extra cc's for scans on the way to there base cause we dont have any map vision other then scans. Xel nagas are always controlled by zerg and show the whole map combined with overlords.
I think removing the xel nagas would be help balance of the game. Or lowering the vision they grant overtime.
This doesn't make any sense at all. You can't say that since Zerg can produce more than one muta at a time, it makes up for time lost building all the other ones. Sure, it reduces the time it takes to go from 0 mutas to 10 mutas, but if I miss my build time by 15 seconds, I've also delayed any drones I'm going to make by 15 seconds. It's exactly the same thing.
Also, missing 3 seconds of building time does not put you behind, since you have mules.
Spreading overlords is easy. Spreading overlords properly and usefully is very very difficult if you are trying to both macro, inject, and spread creep at the same time. You have to be aware of when you are building overlords, where your scouting deficiencies are, and send your overlords to the proper place. Terran just goes 4c and clicks exactly what they want to see, whenever they want.
Why are you talking about this "finishing the game" stuff in the context of intel and scouting? You don't need 15 scans ahead of your army to know which exact pixel his banelings are on, you stim one marine and run it up there, see all of his stuff, siege your 25 tanks, and autowin because of tank splash and marine dps.
If anything, the one balance change that this game needs is to make early-mid game Zerg scouting easier. IIRC, they increased overseer cost a few patches back - that change needs to be reversed, and the cost maybe should be lowered. There have been other solutions to solve the scouting problem, and I don't have them all, but I do have the knowledge to know that it is a major issue.
QED, /thread.
Also, that image posted above me is full of epic truth and win.
|
It's harder in the sense that there's more "housekeeping" stuff you need to do. You have to continue to stay up on your creep spread and larva inject and scouting. If you forget to use race mechanic as protoss or terran it doesn't hurt you as much, so in that sense it's more difficult. Once you get that down, the micro is easier IMO since there's not as much stuff to micro and less decisions you have overall.
After diamond/masters there is a dramatic shift in the mechanics where the other races have a more difficult time with unit control and decision making.
|
to whoever said zerg doesnt have all in rushes, zerg got nydus worms + bane busts that does sick i mean really sick damage to buildings. even though bane bust vs protoss isnt that effective due to forcefield. I play all 3 races for fun and I find protoss the easiest race to play while z and t were pretty much the same.
|
zerg is only mechanically harder to play, but i believe Terran is the hardest race to play and win in high levels, because it involves a whole lot of creativity, a ton of micro, and blind luck.
in every TvZ and TvP game i've watched, winning T players rarely play standard to win; since T is significantly weak lategame against Z and P, the onus of harassing always falls on T, and good T players had to pull off all sorts of MacGuyver shit just to get even with the other races.
|
At the highest levels, the pro levels? I would say no. In terms of battles, zerg has lost almost all the skilled micro that pros pull off. Mutas can no longer stack, the defiler is gone, the lurker is gone. Terran and protoss have a few more abilities that pros can take advantage of. The zerg skill cap is pretty low.
Larva inject and supply cost of zerg units also reduce the zerg skill cap. Hydras cost 1 supply in BW so the trade off for using larva for drones or an army is more prevalent. Zerg were kinda rebalanced to use fewer, more powerful, more expensive units in SC2 so you don't need as much larva.
|
On March 23 2011 22:11 Sniffy wrote:
Zerg doesnt have the equivalent of 4gate or banshee/stim pushes. And early game is unstable due to most people knowing how to deny scouting overlords.
Early game zerg is harder. Past the early game its equal.
People keep saying this, but, late game zerg is the same difficulty as late game toss? I duno, the ease of toss macro at that point is just overwhelming to me. The most difficulty I've had with toss in the late game is how many warpgates to build.
|
At the top level, I think all races are almost equal in terms of difficulty to play.
It's true that Zerg requires the most experience (due to being the reactive race) but at the top levels, that experience is already gained by most pros already.
I do believe that Zerg is the hardest race to get to the top. I don't think many people will disagree with me here. It's very unforgiving, especially if you don't have the experience when playing zerg.
As Terran or Protoss, you can practice several solid builds over and over again and still do decently well because most of the time, they will dictate the pace of the game against zerg.
Zergs can't just practice 1/2 builds per match, they play reactively against T/P and, therefore, as a result, is the hardest race to get to the top level because it requires so much experience.
|
On March 23 2011 22:22 Maynarde wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 22:16 Sniffy wrote:On March 23 2011 22:11 Maynarde wrote:
Actually there are some ling + roach all ins that you can do that have similar timings and are REALLY hard to stop. Are they as reliable as 4gate/stim? Ive never tried that stuff Nah, but like 4 gates and stim rushes they're pretty much an insta win against a fast expand. Should check it out man, there's a thread on it I think. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=190292
That timing is not at all similar to a 4-gate or Banshee rush
|
|
|
If you played Z in BW, it's very similar. If you'd never played Z before, T and P are more intuitive. I wouldn't say Z is harder to play.
|
zerg is the least forgiving in many ways:
larva injects
bad engagements
too lazy to go on.
with zerg, one missclick changes the game, in stark comparison it usually takes a protoss a couple thousand actions to lose a game.
|
|
|
It's all relative. If you're used to turtling behind a wall the whole time (i.e. Terran), then yes, Zerg is hard to play. If you're used to the feeling of paranoia and the instinct to react that most good Zerg players have, then no, Zerg isn't hard.
|
Zerg is different. Because of this, zerg could have the most overpowered units and you would still see zerg players loose because of the drone vs fighting unit problem.
I encourage non zerg players to try zerg and face certain rushes, just so they can get a feel of how this is.
|
Of course it is the hardest, easy thread.
What has really pushed me into switching away from zerg is watching so many T and P at high masters doing really fast FE's. If I see a protoss open forge for example, I know I am behind, period. It is extremely difficult to take a fast third and drone up safely and defend a fast 6gate attack...
Basically, I feel like I am being forced to be aggressive and punish my opponent, when I always thought it should be the other way around. Zerg is supposed to FE, and T/P are supposed to try and punish that. Switching roles and forcing zerg to be aggressive when there are so few options available just drives me nuts. You can roach rush, but good players will always have a void ray out in time. You can nydus, but good players will always scout. So long as these fast protoss expansions are viable I will lean toward protoss.
|
Zerg gameplay has a higher degree of freedom, that's for sure.
Maybe that is why people think zerg is harder to play
and maybe that is why people think zerg has more potential than other races
(see why Idra picked zerg in the first place).
|
personally i think it comes down to which race feels more natural. players like idra and ret naturally have good macro mechanics so it comes easy to them. players like mc and kiwikaki have good micro and thought out build orders. terran players are in the middle of these two.
|
I know is that its a masochistic experience sometimes, hehe. I spend all that time spreading creep and it takes is one observer or scan to undo it all. It gets even more mentally taxing when you start to read on forums how Zerg players need to start spreading creep and overlords around more. 
And then there are the awesome moments, where you have map control for three minutes and suddenly your up two bases and pouring tons and tons of units down the enemy's gullet and they can't keep up with your cruise control production.
Frankly I don't know if its harder, I just know its fun to play.
|
Well I play half Protoss, and half Terran/Zerg. From my experience, Zerg is definitely the most difficult race to master.
I'm not saying that it's the most underpowered race, nor I'm saying that people already master any race.
I'm just saying that if you take a look at the "easy to learn, difficult to master" adage, Zerg is not the most easy to learn, and is definitely the most difficult to master.
Of course things could change, as the metagame evolves, I think that in the near future Protoss is going to be very hard in the late-game; I believe that as the competition reaches higher point, the Protoss deathball will lose effectiveness. Thus Protoss players will definitely need to step their game up and micro their units more carefully.
It's all about the unit's range really. Protoss late-game army got melee units, low range units, high-range units, and caster units.
I can tell you that individually micro'ing sentries, collossus, blink stalkers, chargelots, and whatever flying units, is totally insanely difficult. Tbh I haven't seen a Protoss that masters late-game unit control. But I'm confident that it will become mandatory sooner or later.
As for Terran I believe it's expected that we're going to see a shift in late-game playstyles. At the moment I feel that players aren't really abusing siege tanks ability in accordance with the architecture of the maps. Terran players will definitely have to focus on this if they want to have a shot at controlling the ground.
Moreso, I feel that late-game SCV control is going to be mandatory in the near-future. Let me explain this:
-SCV can be repaired AND healed.
-They can repair mech army, siege tanks, THORS, BC's
- You can make up for the lack of income by using MULES.
-it can be very hard to reinforce a mech army.
Honestly I think that in the future we'll see a lot more SCVs being used on the battlefield in order to extend the mech army's lifespan.
So late-game Terran is going to revolve around mech positioning, SCV control, and MMM micro.
Of course all of the above is my opinion based on personal experience.
|
well the last time i played around with races, toss brought me to diamond and zerg to master, while i am platin with terran hehe. Terran is my favorite race though. I think Zerg is pretty easy at low level (so middle divisionish master and below).
So i guess dependend on your talents some races are easier. And you always can play zerg like terran or toss (% amount of larva into workers so it will be like you have a raks and a cc in one) So its more a point of omg its so hard to manage my larva because i can build everything from it. No its not hard, its just hard to squeeze out that super duper advantage you have with the larva system.
Terran worker + ccs are the hardest to manage, you have the worst worker production you need your worker everywhere even for bio (bunker setup hehe).
But I agree that the top level looks like zerg is having a harder time. I can only say it looks like it. I saw some zerg games where the zerg played like a bioterran. It looked hard to execute but not harder as its for a terran. And it was even stronger since of stuff like burrow and the allmighty zerg vision you gain after having map control for a few minutes.
But unlike bw i don't think maps have to be heavily balanced towards a race to make the game fair. The difficult to learn and master a race is pretty close together. Maybe zerg is a bit harder because of the selection system and a few other things. (putting 100 melee units in one group is like attacking with 20 units ...) And watching games at you only see up to 1 or 2 unit groups, and selection for battle micro is done by hand, which is harder for a zerg then for someone with ranged units.
|
On March 24 2011 02:01 KevinIX wrote:
If you played Z in BW, it's very similar. If you'd never played Z before, T and P are more intuitive. I wouldn't say Z is harder to play.
I played Z in BW. Yes you could abuse zerg in Bw (2 port wraith quick corsar proxy rax) But its not near the amount of bullshit abusive strats in sc2. And and these strats are so hard to tell apart from each other unlike in bw that you are actaully guessing what the p or t will do
|
I’m not one to speak about top tier Zerg players but I believe it takes a little more skill to play as Zerg. For one, as you say, you have to sacrifice ether workers or army to build ether workers or your army. But what Zerg have is the ability to build 3-19(depends on larva) units out of one place while other races have to build multiple buildings to produce the same number of units. To build three units simultaneously as Terran, let us say marines, they have to build three 150 mineral barracks at the cost of 450 minerals, while Zerg have the build a 200 mineral building, let us say 250 because of the drone. As some of the other comments have pointed out though all the races at the pro level take skill to play, an example is of MC’s force field placements (killed July in code s finals), but I’m only looking at the unit producing aspect of the game not the micro. Zerg are, in my opinion, the trickiest race to play because you have to sacrifice ether a super robust economy or a super army, it all just depends on what stage the game is in that you have to choose between the two while others do not have to worry about this choice.
|
I think it is definitely harder to LEARN to play as zerg at a high level, BUT that doesnt really mean that its the hardest race to actually play once you learn it. I'm not sure exactly, but i would say it is about the same difficulty for all races.
|
K, you'd have to define hardest to play a little better.
Is it harder to play optimally (as in using a race to its full potential)? I don't really think so. I used to consider Zerg the hardest to macro with but after playing around with the other races I don't think that's really true for Terran (but god is it ever for toss). Terran is just as hard to macro consistently and in some cases its harder to determine when you should be adding your buildings and whatnot. I don't think Zerg demands any more micro than Terran either and a bio TvZ army probably has the most demanding control.
Now, is it harder to play as in is it harder to score wins? I'd say yes. It may not be any easier for Terran and Protoss (although it probably is for Protoss) to perfectly use the tools of their race perfectly, for example, but when those tools are ridiculously strong to begin with it kinda evens out. We'll have to see how 1.3 plays out but up to this point I believe Zerg's been the weaker race inherently so just in terms of winning (that's what the game is all about after all) yes, I'd say Zerg is the hardest at high levels.
|
Not to metion if we don't spend our macro mechanic on time we can't use it later like the other races.
I like it this way because I feel really good when I macro perfectly. To me it's more rewarding to play Zerg.
|
at the lower levels when its hard to decide between droning and making units, zerg is by far the hardest race. They have to maintain creep spread and constantly be alert. Once u get high masters tho, I feel zerg is the easiest race (atleast macro wise) because for one they dont have to pay a penalty for supply block, (have all larvae stockpiled and ready to burst out), and sencondly because they do not have to decide when to throw down unit producing structures ( the closes thing to this is the "macro hatch" but thats easy). These 2 elements makes it so the most important thing to zerg macro is just keeping up with injects, which imo is much simpler than the other races. It really depends on skill level and since op saying high masters, i would say zerg is the easiest (macro mechanics).
|
i get really frustrated with people who cannot concede that zerg is the hardest race to play, out of all the races. It's clearly the most unforgiving. It has the least cost-effective harass. You can be punished much harder than the other races for relatively minor mistakes.
People have their own definition of 'hardest' when confronted with this question. Additionally, psychologically, i think most people do not want to admit that one specific race out of the 3 is harder than the rest, because it creates the possibility for imbalance.
So, my point is that most people will outright deny this claim because they associate so many negative things to its wording. Instead of admitting the fact that zerg is the hardest, they'll say things like, "it just takes longer" and "you need more experience with it'.
In a balanced game, this would not be necessary. The learning curve on all the races should be the same. The skill requirement should be leveled out. The fact of the matter is that we have seen countless less skilled terrans and protosses beat higher skilled zerg. We have not seen the opposite even fractionally. Results speak for themselves.
Claiming 'zerg has not been figured out' is not an argument. It just proves imbalance. One race shouldn't take longer or be harder to figure out. Why should one race be penalized this way?
|
The question begs to be asked:
Would Idra be better if he had mastered toss or terran play instead? Would fruitdealer?
|
if it is that hard to decide when to build drones, just cripple yourself to build drones from one hatch only (if opponent expands, produce drones from 2 .. etc.). This way your drone/army ratio will be ~equal to your opponent. Anyway you cripple your play with that, actually it is an advantage for Z to have the production flexibility !
|
On March 24 2011 04:13 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:
if it is that hard to decide when to build drones, just cripple yourself to build drones from one hatch only (if opponent expands, produce drones from 2 .. etc.). This way your drone/army ratio will be ~equal to your opponent. Anyway you cripple your play with that, actually it is an advantage for Z to have the production flexibility ! Yeah, as everyone knows when you are a zerg you are basically wanting to be the cheapest bastard you can be. What I mean by this is you want to make the most drones as possible while making just enough units to hold off certain attacks. Knowing when to drone at the proper times, take an expansion and make units is one of the hallmarks of a great and upcoming zerg player. This is partially what makes playing zerg so difficult is doing all of this while scouting and gathering intel, spreading creep, hitting your injects, and macroing. Zerg definitely requires high APM and a lot of practice games to reveal all the cheese builds and timing attacks. As a zerg if you are not familiar with a build or a timing attack it makes it hard to judge how many drones and units you actually should produce.
|
On March 24 2011 03:53 Rob28 wrote:
The question begs to be asked:
Would Idra be better if he had mastered toss or terran play instead? Would fruitdealer?
Both Idra and Morrow switched race to zerg cited the reason being that they did all they "mastered" terran mechanically and hit a ceiling where they couldn't really improve as much. With Z there's always things to do.
|
On March 24 2011 04:20 VoirDire wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 03:53 Rob28 wrote:
The question begs to be asked:
Would Idra be better if he had mastered toss or terran play instead? Would fruitdealer? Both Idra and Morrow switched race to zerg cited the reason being that they did all they "mastered" terran mechanically and hit a ceiling where they couldn't really improve as much. With Z there's always things to do. IdrA played terran for less than a month in the beta, he didn't master anything. This is what TLO and Morrow said when TLO had initially switched to zerg after leaving korea and now plays random. IdrA has played zerg most of the beta and as you may know since the start of starcraft II's release.
|
I feel zerg is extremely hard if you're new. At the prolevel, I think zerg is much easier to play. When I played random at 3600+ masters, it felt to me that protoss was by far the easiest in all MUs(except in pvp, that was the hardest to learn at all past 4gate). My apm was about around 100 to 120 and the macro mechanics were ridiculously easy...i could do it with my eyes closed. Playing zerg, at first I always thought it was hardest to macro with because thats what I had always heard, but it ended up being just all about injects and knowing when to make drones/units, which you can easily understand with some game sense and vision on the map. Terran had by far the hardest macro mechanics, and I also felt if you were going mech you had to have extremely good army control because 1 mistake with tanks or a tank line can cost you the game.
So...I feel that zerg is in the middle. It's harder than protoss by far, but a little less harder than terran at a higher level. At low levels, however, zerg is by far the hardest and terran is in the middle while toss is the easiest (you can just sit on your and make armies at lower levels, which is something you can still actually do at high levels and do just fine)
|
I didn't say he mastered terran as a race, I said he mastered it mechanically. I.e. couldn't spend his apm.
I don't think relatively low apm players like sjow or goody could have been as good zerg-players as they are terran-players.
|
not necessarily harder to play... but hard to win?
|
On March 24 2011 04:20 VoirDire wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 03:53 Rob28 wrote:
The question begs to be asked:
Would Idra be better if he had mastered toss or terran play instead? Would fruitdealer? Both Idra and Morrow switched race to zerg cited the reason being that they did all they "mastered" terran mechanically and hit a ceiling where they couldn't really improve as much. With Z there's always things to do.
If they couldn't improve any more, wouldn't that be a case against zerg being the hardest at pro level? Because it sounds as though they'd hit a wall as terran, which to me implies that they were stumped by playing terran better at pro level (i.e. harder to play it). Am I wrong?
For instance, lets say that if I kept at it, I know I'd get into grandmasters with zerg. But let's also say I got into diamond as terran and couldn't go further because I'd hit a high level progression barrier (ie. wasted APM or some such thing). Wouldn't that mean it's easier to be a pro at zerg than at terran?
|
I play Zerg at a 3700 level and Protoss at a 3500 level. I've played P much longer, but find Z simply easier to play. They're much more forgiving when you make mistakes, and so much of what you need to do is "simple,. menial tasks" like injecting larva which, while it might take some time to get used to, is the easiest thing in the world (and much easier than mules or chrono) once you have the timing in your head.
I think zerg is MUCH harder to learn to play a basic, competent game with; you are punished to a huge degree every time you miss an inject. However, once you reach a pseudo-competent level (ie, inject and creep tumor timings are second nature), it kind of feels like zerg are by far the easiest to reach high masters with. When I play zerg, it feels a bit unfair (not imba, to be sure), even; most I play don't even get to the point where I have the oppotrtunity to win by doing something intelligent. Just because zerg are so mobile, I win because my opponent makes a mistake and it's dreadfully easy (and pretty much an instant victory) to punish them for it.
I have a little bit of experience with T, too, and I feel that they ultimately have the most difficult mechanics and are (by a fairly substantial margin) the most difficult to master. Yeah, rax timing pushes are even easier than 4gating, but outside of that, they're just really difficult.
|
On March 24 2011 01:06 Boundless wrote:
Also, missing 3 seconds of building time does not put you behind, since you have mules.
This Line makes complete fucking sense cause mules help ur building produce units right?
|
It's the hardest race because of decision makeing,not because of balance.
balance comes later.
|
I find Z to be the second easiest to play and Toss to be the easiest. Terran I actually find to be the hardest to play at higher levels (Oh god am I gunna be flamed for this). Zerg is macro oriented and the army control seems to be a lot easier than terran has to. Again is preference though for your race. Good Luck with terran and welcome though you may need to apologize for play this race.
|
Zerg is definitely the hardest race to win with, constantly.
This could mean that is the hardest to play, underpowered or BOTH :D
Reasons:
-you have to scout! you cannot just do a build like 4WG or xRAX
-you cannot forget queen injections
-your army is mostly melee, only atacks ground, made of glass, not money efficient and cannot go over 200
-you have to be ahead in economy that means less army and more places to defend
-you have to spread creep
-you have to learn how to leave with all the loses from noobs that just get void+colosus or massThor from 2 base and then 1a all your 6 bases and you loose 4 times a 200 army just to find that there is nothing you can do! all this after you mastered how to survive 2rax 4wg bunkers or cannon rush!
For P and T just remember to always have marines or stalkers they are good fast and shoot both ground and air - the rest are details :D
|
On March 24 2011 00:33 TeWy wrote:
Zerg is the best and/or easiest race to play.
Just check how many top 200 Zerg players there are, the theoretical number should be 20% (the overall ratio of zerg players on ladder).
You can also check this for all the leagues... as the league gets higher the ratio of Zergs get higher...
2 possibilities : Zerg players are better, Zerg race is easier/better.
Or the top 200 isn't representative of the entire ladder in terms of racial distribution. Like if there was one race that, say, had a single player campaign and attracted a lot of casual, never-see-platinum players.
|
At the highest levels, MC cuts probes for most of his attacks, doesn't he? Protoss. I play masters and I have a lot of builds where I cut probes as Protoss.
|
On March 23 2011 21:37 freetgy wrote:
Zerg is not the hardest, but it needs experiance, which comes from playing alot.
^^ this means it's harder. Need less experience to play = easier. Need more experience to play = harder.
Agree with OP, if only because of the decision-making processes involved. I don't believe the mechanics are any more difficult than those of terran or toss. One mechanic that i can see as being namely easier is that our supply is built at the same time as our units, so we don't have to waste time placing pylons/depots.
However, as many of the top players have repeatedly said: 'If terran or toss makes a stupid army decision, they are behind. If zerg makes a stupid army decision, they just plain die." This statement applies to the macro mechanic of zerg in general.
It comes down to this:
If terran/toss builds workers and suddenly decides that they need units for defense instead, they can cancel the workers and spend the money on units. If zerg suddenly decides they need units to hold an attack, they better damn well not have started a round of drones or else they just plain die, especially in situations where the rush distance time is shorter than the time to build spine crawlers. It is well-known fact that zerg's scouting ability is the worst in the early-midgame. This fact, coupled with the immense pressure to make the correct decision between drones/units means that games are often completely luck-based for zerg when scouting information is completely denied.
|
Why does zerg have to choose between droning and making units. I realize their spawns are all larvae dependant, but why can't you be more balanced in your early and mid game production cycles?
Does making "droning up" and neglecting combat units give you such a huge advantage over spreading out your drone building process?
Thanks
|
I think at the lower levels, Zerg is harder to play. But at the Platinum and above, once you've mastered Larva Injects and drone timing, it's not hard at all. I play Zerg on my off race, and even if it's not as good as my protoss, it's probably still masters league level.
|
I dont think is harder... it just has other mechanics. And you described a Macro Zerg... an agressive zerg dont have these problem... or a lot less than the macro zerg.
The other races have problems : Protoss with techning and perfect FF at high level and Terran with macro speed (Yuo know since you play terrans, its the hardest race to macro) and hardest race in term of certains decision with units... they have to make units before the other races... because they dont have WG or 100 larvae...
Every race's has difficulties...
|
On March 24 2011 04:20 VoirDire wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 03:53 Rob28 wrote:
The question begs to be asked:
Would Idra be better if he had mastered toss or terran play instead? Would fruitdealer? Both Idra and Morrow switched race to zerg cited the reason being that they did all they "mastered" terran mechanically and hit a ceiling where they couldn't really improve as much. With Z there's always things to do.
WRONG. For Morrow I don't know but Idra played toss first in sc2, then zerg because it fit his style more. Zerg fits Idra's style better which is too macro. Morrow I think switched for what you said.
And Yes I do think if Morrow/Idra/Fruitdealer were terran/toss and only played those races sense beta I imagine they would do even better in tournaments.
|
|
|
On March 24 2011 06:16 Fitness wrote:
Why does zerg have to choose between droning and making units. I realize their spawns are all larvae dependant, but why can't you be more balanced in your early and mid game production cycles?
Does making "droning up" and neglecting combat units give you such a huge advantage over spreading out your drone building process?
Thanks
It gives a huge advantage if it isn't punished by Protoss or Zerg.
a worker pays for it self in around 2-3mins everything after that is pure +++++++++++
But obviously you lack Attacking Units early on,
so one style is to play very reactive and get only as many units as you need to survive and then smash them with your economic advantage.
It is said that Zerg is the hardest to play because of this, but that isn't an disadvantage, it is the biggest advantage of all 3 races.
Obviously Zerg could play like both other races limiting himself to building +1 drone per hatchery and play like the other races, but this would need more micro with units.
|
On March 24 2011 04:21 HEROwithNOlegacy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 04:20 VoirDire wrote:On March 24 2011 03:53 Rob28 wrote:
The question begs to be asked:
Would Idra be better if he had mastered toss or terran play instead? Would fruitdealer? Both Idra and Morrow switched race to zerg cited the reason being that they did all they "mastered" terran mechanically and hit a ceiling where they couldn't really improve as much. With Z there's always things to do. IdrA played terran for less than a month in the beta, he didn't master anything. This is what TLO and Morrow said when TLO had initially switched to zerg after leaving korea and now plays random. IdrA has played zerg most of the beta and as you may know since the start of starcraft II's release.
I recall idra playing toss when beta started.
|
United States12607 Posts
Poorly disguised balance discussion thread.
![[image loading]](http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRzd4-S32FAkV95PwZN72d94rCH3GE1ZmNw7goQx2ex0k2EZ4309Q&t=1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
