A zerg who only started making a splash in the scene after patch 1.4.3 balance changes (patch notes), released the tenth of may 2012, implying that this zerg only is where he is at due to the patch, and the supposed zerg imbalance that comes with it.
- Are patchzergs real, or are they just a figment of our imagination?
Axiom: If the last balance update in truth is the reason these zergs made it to the top, one would assume high winrates in especially TvZ and possibly PvZ (some would argue that the overlord change made it easier for zerg to be greedy in this matchup as well) while their ZvZ winrates dropped off.
Why? Well we can safely assume that the balance in ZvZ was not affected by this or any previous patch, and while getting further in tournaments, they will now face the better pre-patch zergs. If these zergs in truth got to where they are because of the patch, they should lose more of these matches.
Data gathering
With the conclusion of IEM Cologne this weekend, three names where on the lips of people when the patchzergs came into mentioning. All of them european:
Using the TLPD for previous matches, and adding the matches of this weekend from IEM Cologne, I gathered the overall winrate statistics for all matchups for these players and the overall winrate since the 10th of may.
Results
SortOf Pre patch ZvT 13-21 (38,2%) Pre patch ZvZ 13-5 (72,2%) Pre patch ZvP 11-15 (42,3%)
After patch ZvT 9-13 (40,9%) After patch ZvZ 17-15 (53,1%) After patch ZvP 28-19 (59,6%)
Both sLivko and VortiX historicly had Zerg versus Terran as their weakest matchup, while doing well in the other two. Looking at the statistics, VortiX used to be an absolute beast in ZvP and doing very well in ZvZ, while his ZvT was holding him back.
Very little is known about SortOf before the 10th of may, except that he could not win against protoss, at all. There were only 5 recorded matches of him playing ZvZ, so it's hard to tell if it was actually that much better than his other matchups. Interesting to note , though, is that still after the patch, ZvT is still his weakest matchup according to statistics.
They all have gotten a boost versus terran, quite a big one in vortix case from being mediocre, but that is expected since zerg in general has enjoyed a good period against that race. ZvT is still not a dominant matchup for either player.
All of the players seem to do very good against the zergs they face even after making it up to the higher level. I decided to take a look at some results these players have against more notable zergs since the patch.
These players are obviously capable of beating even the best players in ZvZ, a matchup not affected by any balance or patch. Not only are they beating them, but for slivko and vortix it's their strongest matchup, and SortOf barely scrapes by with a 40,9% vs Terran.
Personal Conclusion
There are no patchzergs. And if there are, these are not them. What we have are three players who have worked hard and yes, gotten a boost with the patch, but stayed equally strong versus their zerg counterparts.
Claiming that these players are where they are because of the patch is not only ignorant, but in truth very rude to these people.
However, I do not claim this to be a proof that zerg is not favored/imbalanced against terran. What I am claiming is that these players are not where they are because of it.
Note: Yes I was biased from the start, but only because I was so sad to see these players getting insulted in every second comment during this IEM. I hope these number can put a hold on the name calling, if only for a bit.
Thanks for reading, and feel free to discuss! (sorry for the lack of fancy pictures)
Where was the insulting? Stream chat? That's not an accurate representation of what people with a functioning human brain actually think. Also, you can't take such small amounts of data and go "see, it proves nothing!", proof by contradiction means nothing when what you're trying to prove is ridiculous.
you have to appreciate some of the things the Starcraft community comes up with, but this is just silly in my opinion. too many terms in this game, I honestly don't know what the purpose of this discussion would be.
if a patchzerg is a zerg player who's peforming better after the 1.4.3 patch, and these zerg players have been performing better after the 1.4.3 patch, then yes I suppose they are, but the term doesn't need to exist in my opinion. in any case, I hope you're able to get to the bottom of it.
and if you think calling them patchzergs is insulting then why would you instigate this conversation? it seems a lot of the people responding have never even heard the term before, myself included.
sort of going 50% increase vs toss, wtf??????????????
and yes i do think that patch zergs are real, i havent seen heard any zergs complain about how hard the match ups are for them, its like the game has made a complete opposite balance swtich since beta
People who complain about "patchzergs" are people who have absolutely no idea with regards to who is good in the foreign scene beyond the top 10. "OMG I don't know this guy therefore he's a noob; this noob just beat a player who i know is good, the game must be broken argh"
It's simple. If you want to have an educated opinion on who is good at the moment, you need to follow a lot of starcraft, including the much overlooked daily/weekly cups and smaller invitationals. If you can't be bothered to do that then that's fine, I respect your choice but don't talk about something that you are intentionally uninformed about, it just makes you look ignorant and foolish.
Thank you OP for putting the time and effort into this thread, I agree completely with you. On a semi-related note, this sort of reminds me in a way of Stephano back when he made his breakout, people thought he was a flash in the pan and not a genuinely talented player even though he's had absolute stomps (over top european terrans at the time) dating all the way back to april / may 2011 if I recall correctly.
I'm pretty excited with regards to what the future holds for these players, as well as some others like Ziktomini, JohnnyREcco, Scarlett etc. Always good to have more talent. ^^
I think you're missing a major comparative point. Non "patchzergs". Surely it would make sense to look at the variation in winrates of the other zergs (e.g Stephano) who were big before the patches.
Also there is the timing, which coincides generally with school holidays (for much of the time anyway) where players may either have finished HS and have more time, or simply be on summer holidays, and have more time to practice and play.
On August 20 2012 09:18 nkr wrote: - What is a so called "patchzerg" ?
A zerg who only started making a splash in the scene after patch 1.4.3 balance changes (patch notes), released the tenth of may 2012, implying that this zerg only is where he is at due to the patch, and the supposed zerg imbalance that comes with it.
Wrong. As someone said in the IEM LR thread, patchzergs are pirate zergs that play with eyepatches to make them better other than that I wholeheartedly agree with your post.
You're overrating people's intelligence (just look at the first few posts), it will backfire at best. People will just see the title and it will help popularise the term even though you make the opposite point. You should change the title.
Before I write my response, I want to make it clear that I'm not trying to pass judgement on any of these players. I don't think it's fair to deem them "patch-zergs" until we see how they continue to do as the game develops. It's very clear to me that all three are talented and there's a strong chance they'll be around for a long time.
However, I do want to point out that the patch change to me seems to have effected ZvZ a great deal in that it favors more defensive minded players. With longer ranged queens it became much easier to defend against ling/bane all ins that previously required insane micro and lots of intense back and forth in the early game. The numbers from Vortix and Slivko ZvZs show that both are more defensive minded players and the Queen range did benefit their mirror match. Whether or not that actually means anything is up for debate. It could signify they are less skilled at early game multitasking, or it could simply suggest they are great at defensive minded play and adding queen range finally gave them the weapon they needed to improve.
On August 20 2012 09:29 Lonyo wrote: I think you're missing a major comparative point. Non "patchzergs". Surely it would make sense to look at the variation in winrates of the other zergs (e.g Stephano) who were big before the patches.
Also there is the timing, which coincides generally with school holidays (for much of the time anyway) where players may either have finished HS and have more time, or simply be on summer holidays, and have more time to practice and play.
Well their increase in skill in comparison to existing zergs is what you could argue that the ZvZ is. It was pretty much what I based it all on. If zerg as a whole got an immense boost, these players would have great winrates in ZvP and ZvT, while lacking in ZvZ. This is not the case, as they actually perform best vs other zergs.
On August 20 2012 09:28 Burns wrote: sort of going 50% increase vs toss, wtf??????????????
and yes i do think that patch zergs are real, i havent seen heard any zergs complain about how hard the match ups are for them, its like the game has made a complete opposite balance swtich since beta
On August 20 2012 09:18 nkr wrote: - What is a so called "patchzerg" ?
A zerg who only started making a splash in the scene after patch 1.4.3 balance changes (patch notes), released the tenth of may 2012, implying that this zerg only is where he is at due to the patch, and the supposed zerg imbalance that comes with it.
Wrong. As someone said in the IEM LR thread, oatchzergs are pirate zergs that play with eyepatches to make them better other than that I wholeheartedly agree with your post.
I guess there are two different definitions of the word then ;P
On August 20 2012 09:28 Burns wrote: sort of going 50% increase vs toss, wtf??????????????
and yes i do think that patch zergs are real, i havent seen heard any zergs complain about how hard the match ups are for them, its like the game has made a complete opposite balance swtich since beta
Post patch is then: Record: 20 wins - 17 losses (54.05%)
Which manes a 16% increase in winrate. I think OP might have set the date wrong for SoftOf.
Good catch, must've set the date wrong like you said. Fixed. Thanks. But the post patch date is set correctly I think. Post patch does not include pre patch stats.
On August 20 2012 09:29 Lonyo wrote: I think you're missing a major comparative point. Non "patchzergs". Surely it would make sense to look at the variation in winrates of the other zergs (e.g Stephano) who were big before the patches.
Also there is the timing, which coincides generally with school holidays (for much of the time anyway) where players may either have finished HS and have more time, or simply be on summer holidays, and have more time to practice and play.
Well their increase in skill in comparison to existing zergs is what you could argue that the ZvZ is. It was pretty much what I based it all on. If zerg as a whole got an immense boost, these players would have great winrates in ZvP and ZvT, while lacking in ZvZ. This is not the case, as they actually perform best vs other zergs.
That potentially establishes a baseline movement in skill overall, but looking at the change in vP and vT winrates of established players would give more of an indication of underlying patch-derived changes in winrates. Then you compare the skill movement (ZvZ) and patch movement (established players vT and vP results) to the change in the "patchzerg" vT and vP results to take a guess at whether there is patch related change or skill related change or neither or both.
None of which is an exact science due to the sample size issues and massive variation in the people they play, and skill level of those people Playing a bunch of people in WCS Sweden isn't the same as playing a bunch of Koreans at IEM. While Sweden is good, they aren't (mostly) Korean level good.
On August 20 2012 09:38 Zanno wrote: why do you try taking a look at the winrates of foreign terrans and see how that's going
If you read my post, that was not actually the point of it at all. I was never saying that zerg wasnt favored vs terran. I was saying that these players arent where they are because of it. Please read all of the OP. It's even bolded.
On August 20 2012 09:43 the`postman wrote: Their ZvT win rates should be increasing, that's the whole point of a buff.
Indeed, but their winrates in other matchups should not be increasing(but rather decrease) if they were not legitimately getting better, but rather winning because of the buff. Agree/disagree?
On August 20 2012 09:38 Zanno wrote: why do you try taking a look at the winrates of foreign terrans and see how that's going
If you read my post, that was not actually the point of it at all. I was never saying that zerg wasnt favored vs terran. I was saying that these players arent where they are because of it. Please read all of the OP. It's even bolded.
He means do it vice versa. You can compare the relative jumps to the relative decreases for a better more accurate representation imo.
At least thats what i think he means. I honestly would love to see 2 established/2new of each race, before and after. And then compare all 3.
On August 20 2012 09:38 Zanno wrote: why do you try taking a look at the winrates of foreign terrans and see how that's going
If you read my post, that was not actually the point of it at all. I was never saying that zerg wasnt favored vs terran. I was saying that these players arent where they are because of it. Please read all of the OP. It's even bolded.
He means do it vice versa. You can compare the relative jumps to the relative decreases for a better more accurate representation imo.
At least thats what i think he means. I honestly would love to see 2 established/2new of each race, before and after. And then compare all 3.
Im guess im just curious about ALL the data :/
I'm not really sure what you're getting at. Do you mean taking three terrans that were not top before the patch, and look at stats to see how they didn't get better?
The point here is not about zerg or terran as a race, but rather about specific players and if they got better or are winning because of zergs buff vs T.
On August 20 2012 09:38 Zanno wrote: why do you try taking a look at the winrates of foreign terrans and see how that's going
If you read my post, that was not actually the point of it at all. I was never saying that zerg wasnt favored vs terran. I was saying that these players arent where they are because of it. Please read all of the OP. It's even bolded.
He means do it vice versa. You can compare the relative jumps to the relative decreases for a better more accurate representation imo.
At least thats what i think he means. I honestly would love to see 2 established/2new of each race, before and after. And then compare all 3.
Im guess im just curious about ALL the data :/
I'm not really sure what you're getting at. Do you mean taking three terrans that were not top before the patch, and look at stats to see how they didn't get better?
he means take two already successful zergs (stephano and nerchio maybe?)
On August 20 2012 09:38 Zanno wrote: why do you try taking a look at the winrates of foreign terrans and see how that's going
If you read my post, that was not actually the point of it at all. I was never saying that zerg wasnt favored vs terran. I was saying that these players arent where they are because of it. Please read all of the OP. It's even bolded.
He means do it vice versa. You can compare the relative jumps to the relative decreases for a better more accurate representation imo.
At least thats what i think he means. I honestly would love to see 2 established/2new of each race, before and after. And then compare all 3.
Im guess im just curious about ALL the data :/
I'm not really sure what you're getting at. Do you mean taking three terrans that were not top before the patch, and look at stats to see how they didn't get better?
he means take two already successful zergs (stephano and nerchio maybe?)
I don't see how the statistics of nercho and stephano are useful in seeing the improvement of these three players. If you do the statistics and explain it, I'll add it to the OP.
Weren't most european zergs already patch zergs after the ghost nerf? I mean I remember Stephano already crushing terrans easily but that's around that patch that foreign terrans started to get raped weren't they?
You need to look at who they're beating, not winrates. They've gotten so good so fast that pre patch they weren't playing big slam events. Now that they are, and suddenly they're doing better compared to what they did in online cups. They exist!
On August 20 2012 09:52 Poopi wrote: Weren't most european zergs already patch zergs after the ghost buff? I mean I remember Stephano already crushing terrans easily but that's around that patch that foreign terrans started to get raped weren't they?
After the ghost nerf, ZvT was by most considered somewhat balanced I think, and also the most entertaining matchup. After the queen buff is when all the cries for imbalance really got going. I can't remember people crediting the success of new zergs to the patch at that time
I dislike the new gamer mentality that is flowing around the past several years. Sure, there have always been present in some games, but when I played early MMORPG games, everyone was just plain friendly, even the "big shots", if anyone played DAoC and remembers Darrgen, Lagged Again, The Nameless Ones etc etc. All were actually pretty nice to their opponents. But MMORPG world aside, Warcraft III and Starcraft I were not plagued by these sudden trolls that start to resemble League of Legends of community, which is pretty abysmal.
Several games today, I've ran into Terrans and Protoss that really got outplayed by me (I am not bragging here) and I won fair and square, yet all they did was just trash-talk about how Zerg is imbalanced, it is easy-mode to play it and whatnot. I never blame anyone else other than myself for losing a game, because there is ALWAYS a way to win, if I haven't found it, it is my bad. But if the community does not shift somewhat, e-sports is not a good place to be if anything serious wants to be founded here.
Due to my time on the "internets", I started ignoring such people, this patch made it only easier for Zergs to defend the dreaded Hellion harass, and guess what, Terrans have already figured out a new strat, add Banshees to the mix. I still have difficulty defending it as easy as pros do, but one slip can cost you your early game (today, I lost a game where the opponent was just shutting my Queens down, over time, I had 3k+ minerals and no larvae to spend them on). This was also seen in a pro game, can't remember which one, but the Terran player simply sniped off all Queens and Zerg was left with a bunch of resources he can't spend (50 second Queen build time and 40 seconds for 4 Larvae adds up quickly).
If Zergs had that big of a advantage against Terran opponents, Zerg would be winning everything, which isn't the case.
I do not want to turn this into another "omg Brood Lord OP, omg use Ravens, omg Supply Depot op, omg Overlord imbalanced" and shit like that. Just, for people that are reading this, if you spread and present the community in a troll-sense, the rest will follow. Just played a LoL game in which I was carrying my team with Master Yi (grew tired of playing supports, which I normally play), and when the other team finally got a kill on me almost everyone started spamming "LOL NOOB FUCK YOUR MOTHER IDIOT SHIT CUNT" etc etc. Just don't present SC2 community in such a way to the newcomers, it will pain me to see that his community degrades into what LoL community is (taking LoL as an example, as these two are major e-sports games).
On other note, should we be naming all the Terrans that were successful at the beginning "poor design Terrans, op Terrans, imba Terrans, pre-patched Terrans" etc? Or should we label all former successful Protoss players as "4gate toss players"?
Meh, this will probably turn into another flame war.
On August 20 2012 09:33 Swords wrote: Before I write my response, I want to make it clear that I'm not trying to pass judgement on any of these players. I don't think it's fair to deem them "patch-zergs" until we see how they continue to do as the game develops. It's very clear to me that all three are talented and there's a strong chance they'll be around for a long time.
However, I do want to point out that the patch change to me seems to have effected ZvZ a great deal in that it favors more defensive minded players. With longer ranged queens it became much easier to defend against ling/bane all ins that previously required insane micro and lots of intense back and forth in the early game. The numbers from Vortix and Slivko ZvZs show that both are more defensive minded players and the Queen range did benefit their mirror match. Whether or not that actually means anything is up for debate. It could signify they are less skilled at early game multitasking, or it could simply suggest they are great at defensive minded play and adding queen range finally gave them the weapon they needed to improve.
OP's post doesn't take this into consideration and it's extremely important. I don't know how it got skimmed over and not replied to. ZvZ was changed by the patch.
On August 20 2012 09:38 Zanno wrote: why do you try taking a look at the winrates of foreign terrans and see how that's going
If you read my post, that was not actually the point of it at all. I was never saying that zerg wasnt favored vs terran. I was saying that these players arent where they are because of it. Please read all of the OP. It's even bolded.
He means do it vice versa. You can compare the relative jumps to the relative decreases for a better more accurate representation imo.
At least thats what i think he means. I honestly would love to see 2 established/2new of each race, before and after. And then compare all 3.
Im guess im just curious about ALL the data :/
I'm not really sure what you're getting at. Do you mean taking three terrans that were not top before the patch, and look at stats to see how they didn't get better?
The point here is not about zerg or terran as a race, but rather about specific players and if they got better or are winning because of zergs buff vs T.
Your not understanding. I mean theres an easier way to find out whether or not zergs are winning because of the buff. Take your 4 zergs (or however many patchzergs people think they are), and match it up vs the same stats for Terran. You can look at both of the races to see how far zerg increased, and how far some of the terrans decreased. It gives a more accurate result imo. Seeing how far the terrans decreased in zvt is just as good seeing how high zergs increased in zvt. The first may not show you who patchzergs are, but it will give evidence as to whether or not patchzerg is even real.
On August 20 2012 09:56 SolidMoose wrote: I'm confused. You show giant increases in their ZvT performance and then say they are not patchzergs.
The basis of his argument is that there zvz stats should have decreased if they were patchzergs. Which i dont neccesarilly agree with, because the queen change did change zvz balance. Yes its balanced, but it still makes it easier earlygame, which could mean the zergs are getting an easier ride to lategame where they can evidently win easier against better opponents. At least thats how im seeing the arguments pan out in the LR threads
they are true, most of the winning KesPa players in WCS are Zergs, maybe they should also be included in patchzergs. Also, you should also come up with a name for the Terrans who were strong at the beginning, but faded after they got balanced, like PrePatchTerrans or something
Indeed, their presence can no longer go unnoticed. Over the last three months, sightings of these patchzergs have become commonplace worldwide, with the highest concentrations seemingly in Europe. Environmentalists are concerned about the impact of this invasive species on the ecosystems they now inhabit, as preliminary studies have already shown a decrease in the populations of several local fauna. Though the cause of this has not been conclusively proven to be the arrival of the patchzerg, the correlative nature of the two events has merited further study.
uhh wtf is with those bans on the first page? They didnt say anything out of line -_- I think this post is a bit silly personally. I havnt seen any commentary calling them patch zergs so if anything this will only make it more prominent. It is a small sample size also. These zergs might have just opened themselves up to new strategies. You could probably find zergs doing worse since the patch also and call them antipatch zergs.
On August 20 2012 09:38 Zanno wrote: why do you try taking a look at the winrates of foreign terrans and see how that's going
If you read my post, that was not actually the point of it at all. I was never saying that zerg wasnt favored vs terran. I was saying that these players arent where they are because of it. Please read all of the OP. It's even bolded.
He means do it vice versa. You can compare the relative jumps to the relative decreases for a better more accurate representation imo.
At least thats what i think he means. I honestly would love to see 2 established/2new of each race, before and after. And then compare all 3.
Im guess im just curious about ALL the data :/
I'm not really sure what you're getting at. Do you mean taking three terrans that were not top before the patch, and look at stats to see how they didn't get better?
The point here is not about zerg or terran as a race, but rather about specific players and if they got better or are winning because of zergs buff vs T.
Your not understanding. I mean theres an easier way to find out whether or not zergs are winning because of the buff. Take your 4 zergs (or however many patchzergs people think they are), and match it up vs the same stats for Terran. You can look at both of the races to see how far zerg increased, and how far some of the terrans decreased. It gives a more accurate result imo. Seeing how far the terrans decreased in zvt is just as good seeing how high zergs increased in zvt. The first may not show you who patchzergs are, but it will give evidence as to whether or not patchzerg is even real.
I don't really agree that is has any relevance here. All it will show is that terran has been doing worse versus zerg since the patch, which is not something that I was even questioning.
your analysis on ZvZ does NOT apply. ling/baneling became much weaker in the early game due to queen change. some zerg players may be better than ling/bling micro than others
There are issues in sample size, as it can really be down to individual performance when it's this small. But regardless, on to the stats posted.
The patch affected all match ups, but 1.4.3 and onwards affected TvZ the most out of all of them. While the Queen buff/Overlord buff affects ZvP as well, Terran early pressure has gotten much more difficult. Hellion openings and Bunker pressure have become more difficult with the Queen range, and I think we can all agree on this. Considering that TvZ's metagame has changed to more greedy openings, and heavy Hellion/Banshee types of map control.
Your point on the topic was that these Zergs should be having consistent ZvT, or improvement throughout all 3 match ups otherwise it can be (atleast partially) attributed to Patch changes.
What it showed was that all 3 players listed had a marked improvement in ZvT. I'm not sure how you can conclude that it hasn't affected these players. I won't generalize your findings to all Zergs though, but it looks like you basically created your own counter-argument to your point.
On August 20 2012 09:38 Zanno wrote: why do you try taking a look at the winrates of foreign terrans and see how that's going
If you read my post, that was not actually the point of it at all. I was never saying that zerg wasnt favored vs terran. I was saying that these players arent where they are because of it. Please read all of the OP. It's even bolded.
He means do it vice versa. You can compare the relative jumps to the relative decreases for a better more accurate representation imo.
At least thats what i think he means. I honestly would love to see 2 established/2new of each race, before and after. And then compare all 3.
Im guess im just curious about ALL the data :/
I'm not really sure what you're getting at. Do you mean taking three terrans that were not top before the patch, and look at stats to see how they didn't get better?
The point here is not about zerg or terran as a race, but rather about specific players and if they got better or are winning because of zergs buff vs T.
Your not understanding. I mean theres an easier way to find out whether or not zergs are winning because of the buff. Take your 4 zergs (or however many patchzergs people think they are), and match it up vs the same stats for Terran. You can look at both of the races to see how far zerg increased, and how far some of the terrans decreased. It gives a more accurate result imo. Seeing how far the terrans decreased in zvt is just as good seeing how high zergs increased in zvt. The first may not show you who patchzergs are, but it will give evidence as to whether or not patchzerg is even real.
I don't really agree that is has any relevance here. All it will show is that terran has been doing worse versus zerg since the patch, which is not something that I was even questioning.
which means patchzergs do indeed exist, i just dont get how zvz is ok still makes up for the fact you showed larger than 5 percent increase in winrates for each player in zvt in just a tiny game pool
wait till you have legit amount of games and then run the stats again, it will be worse
My thoughts: I think that the OP does bring up a good discussion (though it is always a minefield to discuss balance), but you simply cannot just look at 3 players and draw a conclusion.
There is absolutely no denying that the patch really helped Zerg players immediately after the patch, when the metagame, particularly ZvT, was in flux. But the term patchzergs suggests that the players were only winning due to the patch, which I think understates the players' ability. I'd wager that the patch did help DRG win MLG Spring, and make the Code S semifinals, but it would be insane to suggest that the patch was the only factor towards DRG's success, and not his inherent talent and experiences.
Likewise, players like Life, Byul, Coca and even Symbol also had great GSTL showings soon after the patch. Aside from possibly Byul, I would not call Life, Coca, or Symbol patchzergs because they are each very strong players in their own right, but the patch definitely helped.
On August 20 2012 09:38 Zanno wrote: why do you try taking a look at the winrates of foreign terrans and see how that's going
If you read my post, that was not actually the point of it at all. I was never saying that zerg wasnt favored vs terran. I was saying that these players arent where they are because of it. Please read all of the OP. It's even bolded.
He means do it vice versa. You can compare the relative jumps to the relative decreases for a better more accurate representation imo.
At least thats what i think he means. I honestly would love to see 2 established/2new of each race, before and after. And then compare all 3.
Im guess im just curious about ALL the data :/
I'm not really sure what you're getting at. Do you mean taking three terrans that were not top before the patch, and look at stats to see how they didn't get better?
The point here is not about zerg or terran as a race, but rather about specific players and if they got better or are winning because of zergs buff vs T.
Your not understanding. I mean theres an easier way to find out whether or not zergs are winning because of the buff. Take your 4 zergs (or however many patchzergs people think they are), and match it up vs the same stats for Terran. You can look at both of the races to see how far zerg increased, and how far some of the terrans decreased. It gives a more accurate result imo. Seeing how far the terrans decreased in zvt is just as good seeing how high zergs increased in zvt. The first may not show you who patchzergs are, but it will give evidence as to whether or not patchzerg is even real.
I don't really agree that is has any relevance here. All it will show is that terran has been doing worse versus zerg since the patch, which is not something that I was even questioning.
which means patchzergs do indeed exist, i just dont get how zvz is ok still makes up for the fact you showed larger than 5 percent increase in winrates for each player in zvt in just a tiny game pool
wait till you have legit amount of games and then run the stats again, it will be worse
No, all this showed was that yes, they are doing better in zvt, but they are not carried by their results in zvt nor are they even their best matchups. This is what I take away from the stats. However they are always up for personal interpretation I suppose.
I'm sorry nkr, but if you look at the statistics, there is a HUGE increase in these specific zergs win rates compared to the decrease. Though sortof is an outlier on this, vortix is proof the patchzerg issue. Along with that, just because they won at this one tournament means little, but the fact that they were able to take out top korean terrans along with wins in the TSL3 proves something. Patch zergs are a thing, much like beta-terrans who 5 rax reapered or who 11/11 raxed. They will be patched out and end up just like Pwn and Trump, not being able to keep up with pack once their "imbalance" (and I use that word loosely) is fixed/found out. At least that is my take on it.
My thoughts: I think that the OP does bring up a good discussion (though it is always a minefield to discuss balance), but you simply cannot just look at 3 players and draw a conclusion.
There is absolutely no denying that the patch really helped Zerg players immediately after the patch, when the metagame, particularly ZvT, was in flux. But the term patchzergs suggests that the players were only winning due to the patch, which I think understates the players' ability. I'd wager that the patch did help DRG win MLG Spring, and make the Code S semifinals, but it would be insane to suggest that the patch was the only factor towards DRG's success, and not his inherent talent and experiences.
Likewise, players like Life, Byul, Coca and even Symbol also had great GSTL showings soon after the patch. Aside from possibly Byul, I would not call Life, Coca, or Symbol patchzergs because they are each very strong players in their own right, but the patch definitely helped.
My problem with your first lines is that this was never meant to discuss balance, and I never drew any conclusions about balance. That part is even bolded. My conclusion was that these players are not where they are because of their ZvT, or the patch if you will.
On August 20 2012 09:38 Zanno wrote: why do you try taking a look at the winrates of foreign terrans and see how that's going
If you read my post, that was not actually the point of it at all. I was never saying that zerg wasnt favored vs terran. I was saying that these players arent where they are because of it. Please read all of the OP. It's even bolded.
He means do it vice versa. You can compare the relative jumps to the relative decreases for a better more accurate representation imo.
At least thats what i think he means. I honestly would love to see 2 established/2new of each race, before and after. And then compare all 3.
Im guess im just curious about ALL the data :/
I'm not really sure what you're getting at. Do you mean taking three terrans that were not top before the patch, and look at stats to see how they didn't get better?
The point here is not about zerg or terran as a race, but rather about specific players and if they got better or are winning because of zergs buff vs T.
Your not understanding. I mean theres an easier way to find out whether or not zergs are winning because of the buff. Take your 4 zergs (or however many patchzergs people think they are), and match it up vs the same stats for Terran. You can look at both of the races to see how far zerg increased, and how far some of the terrans decreased. It gives a more accurate result imo. Seeing how far the terrans decreased in zvt is just as good seeing how high zergs increased in zvt. The first may not show you who patchzergs are, but it will give evidence as to whether or not patchzerg is even real.
I don't really agree that is has any relevance here. All it will show is that terran has been doing worse versus zerg since the patch, which is not something that I was even questioning.
which means patchzergs do indeed exist, i just dont get how zvz is ok still makes up for the fact you showed larger than 5 percent increase in winrates for each player in zvt in just a tiny game pool
wait till you have legit amount of games and then run the stats again, it will be worse
No, all this showed was that yes, they are doing better in zvt, but they are not carried by their results in zvt nor are they even their best matchups. This is what I take away from the stats. However they are always up for personal interpretation I suppose.
Ok, ill concede. But if you want the whining to stop. These so called 'not patchzergs' need to be doing some shit better. You wont convince anybody with that small of a sample size, when people just watched vortex 1a his whole army back and forth across the map to deal with each and every drop.
Its not just the stats that are making LR threads blow up. Its the fact we are watching the games, and can see apparently inferior players winning.
On August 20 2012 10:03 Anta wrote: SortOf just finfished school around april/may an started gaming full time from there.
Stephano says ZvT is pretty balanced. Sure he owns Protoss but this is how he rolls, other zergs still have trouble (ask idra).
slivko and vortix are just fucking good.
T whining is just awful... we had so many tournaments with TvT semis and finals - it SUCKS! bless god that time is over..
Stephano says TvZ is balanced cause talk about his own experience. His ZvP is so strong that he says Z is too good in ZvP. But his TvZ is a liitle bit worse.
Also DRG, MMA, MKP, ForGG and many other Terran said Z was too strong after the patch.
Idra always has trouble cause he is just bad.
And your argument about slivko and vortix is invalid, their opponents were fucking good too, and clearly favorite.
On August 20 2012 10:05 docvoc wrote: I'm sorry nkr, but if you look at the statistics, there is a HUGE increase in these specific zergs win rates compared to the decrease. Though sortof is an outlier on this, vortix is proof the patchzerg issue. Along with that, just because they won at this one tournament means little, but the fact that they were able to take out top korean terrans along with wins in the TSL3 proves something. Patch zergs are a thing, much like beta-terrans who 5 rax reapered or who 11/11 raxed. They will be patched out and end up just like Pwn and Trump, not being able to keep up with pack once their "imbalance" (and I use that word loosely) is fixed/found out. At least that is my take on it.
But these players were extremely good in the other matchups pre patch. What happened after the patch is that their ZvT came up to par with their other matchups. I feel that this shows that they are in fact very good players who with the new patch got a grip of a matchup which previously was their worst.
But yeah, I guess we just read into it differently =P
On August 20 2012 09:38 Lonyo wrote: None of which is an exact science due to the sample size issues and massive variation in the people they play, and skill level of those people Playing a bunch of people in WCS Sweden isn't the same as playing a bunch of Koreans at IEM. While Sweden is good, they aren't (mostly) Korean level good.
This bears repeating. I'm not really sure having patchzergs is necessarily a bad thing given how slanted the matchup has been in the past, but you're missing this huge factor in the OP. Having players hover around 50% in lower leagues and then suddenly become competitive with GSL-caliber players should raise an eyebrow.
After patch ZvT 9-13 (40,9%) After patch ZvZ 17-15 (53,1%) After patch ZvP 20-17 (54,1%)
VortiX
After patch ZvT 26-14 (65,0%) After patch ZvZ 15-8 (65,2%) After patch ZvP 23-14 (62,2%)
Post-patch sample sizes are too small to draw any meaningful conclusions. With only ~30 games, a minor winning/losing streak, or a favorable/unfavorable matchup would skew results too much.
On August 20 2012 09:38 Lonyo wrote: None of which is an exact science due to the sample size issues and massive variation in the people they play, and skill level of those people Playing a bunch of people in WCS Sweden isn't the same as playing a bunch of Koreans at IEM. While Sweden is good, they aren't (mostly) Korean level good.
This bears repeating. I'm not really sure having patchzergs is necessarily a bad thing given how slanted the matchup has been in the past, but you're missing this huge factor in the OP. Having players hover around 50% in lower leagues and then suddenly become competitive with GSL-caliber players should raise an eyebrow.
This would be true, but only if it was limited to one matchup. If they went from 50% ZvT , 50% ZvZ to a 70% ZvT but still lingering around at a 50% ZvZ, then I would concede that there was something weird about it.
This is not the case with these players. Their ZvTs all got better, and a factor in that was no doubt the patch, but they still remained on a high level with their other matchups, which to me is a sign that they are in fact players who got damn good.
Coming off of two weekends of victories in a row, terrans are up in arms about zerg imbalance.
Should we make a list of the zergs who are allowed to beat terran?
MVP lost to naama at homestory cup.
MC lost to hasuobs this weekend.
Even Korean zergs, it would seem, can loose to European zergs.
IMBALANCE!
Take responsibility for your own shortcomings and recognize the greatness in others. Like, I dont know, Supernova after his match against Vortix:
"Congratulations to the winner. He played really well. I also wanted to thank my fans for cheering on me. I hope I showed exciting games @IEM. Fighting!
On August 20 2012 10:20 Guanyin wrote: An equally interesting way of making a study of this would be looking at how the top Terrans win ratio against Zergs changed with the patch.
Would be interesting yes, but it's a different discussion from the one in the OP
On August 20 2012 10:25 m0ck wrote: Coming off of two weekends of victories in a row, terrans are up in arms about zerg imbalance.
Should we make a list of the zergs who are allowed to beat terran?
MVP lost to naama at homestory cup.
MC lost to hasuobs this weekend.
Even Korean zergs, it would seem, can loose to European zergs.
IMBALANCE!
Take responsibility for your own shortcomings and recognize the greatness in others. Like, I dont know, Supernova after his match against Vortix:
"Congratulations to the winner. He played really well. I also wanted to thank my fans for cheering on me. I hope I showed exciting games @IEM. Fighting!
word!
good players deal with it community likes to whine, sigh
On August 20 2012 10:25 m0ck wrote: Coming off of two weekends of victories in a row, terrans are up in arms about zerg imbalance.
Should we make a list of the zergs who are allowed to beat terran?
MVP lost to naama at homestory cup.
MC lost to hasuobs this weekend.
Even Korean zergs, it would seem, can loose to European zergs.
IMBALANCE!
Take responsibility for your own shortcomings and recognize the greatness in others. Like, I dont know, Supernova after his match against Vortix:
"Congratulations to the winner. He played really well. I also wanted to thank my fans for cheering on me. I hope I showed exciting games @IEM. Fighting!
word!
good players deal with it community likes to whine, sigh
Read the thread on random players, you ain't seen nothing yet.
I can't really understand how you came to the conclusion that they're not patch zergs from your "data". . . . not that I really care but the OP looks uber flawed.
Well, 2 of these guys are still pretty bad vT actually. If you watched some of their play from IEM, they send their ENTIRE army to deal with drops. Vortix is actually pretty good
On August 20 2012 10:03 Anta wrote: SortOf just finfished school around april/may an started gaming full time from there.
Stephano says ZvT is pretty balanced. Sure he owns Protoss but this is how he rolls long before 1.3.4 , other zergs still have trouble (ask idra).
slivko and vortix are just fucking good.
T whining is just awful... we had so many tournaments with TvT semis and finals - it SUCKS! bless god that time is over..
Yeah, now comes the times where finals are played zvz, watching those amazing and exciting slow and dull roach on roach battles, or standard every game early ling baneling aggression, you just can't predict what's gonna happen!!!! Hopefully we'll have a lot more of those to come!!!
On August 20 2012 10:33 KawaiiRice wrote: I can't really understand how you came to the conclusion that they're not patch zergs from your "data". . . . not that I really care but the OP looks uber flawed.
I guess you didn't care enough to read what I wrote before " my data ". You'll find why my conclusion is what it is. You say it looks flawed but not why, which makes me think you only looked at the results without reading the rest.
Please read it and give me a more detailed opinion, I would love to hear it from a respectable player like yourself.
Fake. It's simple these so called parch zergs people throw around would have made a splash as soon as patch hit. Now of days terrans are winning in tvz again (well Korean terrans). Zvt is already swinging pretty even again in Korea and the patch didn't make zvp broken its still balanced and boring to watch and play.
The thing is, patch zergs seem to only exist in the foreign scene. Zergs in korea had a short but strong revival in GSTL, but have settled back down into being even, possibly below terran and toss. And so we've had european zergs crushing korean terrans, but korean terrans generally doing fine vs korean zergs. So in conclusion: EU OP.
On August 20 2012 09:18 nkr wrote: I hope these number can put a hold on the name calling, if only for a bit.
Thanks for reading, and feel free to discuss! (sorry for the lack of fancy pictures)
What the fuck? These numbers will only add fuel to the patchzerg flames. An increase to ZvT across the board? And you thought this would be supportive?
Ultimately the most important thing to note is that correlation does not equal causation. Without the patch I'm sure these players would have improved and had similar results.
On August 20 2012 09:18 nkr wrote: I hope these number can put a hold on the name calling, if only for a bit.
Thanks for reading, and feel free to discuss! (sorry for the lack of fancy pictures)
What the fuck? These numbers will only add fuel to the patchzerg flames. An increase to ZvT across the board? And you thought this would be supportive?
Ultimately the most important thing to note is that correlation does not equal causation. Without the patch I'm sure these players would have improved and had similar results.
No one would expect any less than an increase in ZvT across the board. ZvT in general is much more zerg favored now than it used to be before the patch. However if they were patch zergs then surely ZvT would be the matchup carrying them since patch ? that's what the stats show has not happened
Anyone trying to claim that these guys only got good due the the patch clearly don't follow developing SC2 players (and slivko I'd argue is pretty developed, whereas SortOf and Vortix have more recently have been making waves - from my own experience I've seen SoftOf destroying the daily tourneys for quite a long time now). And yes OP, I read your post and saw that you are saying they aren't "patchzergs." TBH I don't think any one player can be considered a patchzerg; the baddies are still bad and the good zergs just got that much more of a leg up (i.e. they still deserve the results they're getting).
I think its right to assume that their success is largely due to the patch.
I think its wrong to assume that this is because the patch made zerg overpowered against terran.
The patch only exacerbated Zergs lategame strength by reducing the high rate of Terran early game all-ins which created the initial equilibrium (what Blizzard calls "balance"). I think Terran just needs more options late game, design wise, and then it will be more balanced.
I dont get it...the game seems pretty balanced but since everyone hates losing they seem to blame on whoever wins. Since terran just continue to build marine/tank and not try to change strategies seems like they blame the patch more and more.
Patch Zerg A zerg who only started making a splash in the scene after patch 1.4.3 balance changes, released the tenth of may 2012, implying that this zerg only is where he is at due to the patch, and the supposed zerg imbalance that comes with it.
Campaign Terran A terran who only made a splash in the scene before patch 1.4.3 balance changes, released the tenth of may 2012, implying that this terran only was where he was at due to initial terran design that Blizzard apparently spent more time on for WoL single player terran campaign, and the supposed terran imbalance that came with it. Patch Terran A terran who will only start making a splash in the scene after patch 2.X.X balance changes in HotS, released sometime in 201X, implying that this terran will only be where he will be at due to the patch, and the supposed terran imbalance that will come with it.
Campaign Zerg A zerg who will only make a splash in the scene before patch 2.X.X balance changes in HotS, released sometime in 201X, implying that this zerg will only be where he will be at due to initial zerg design that Blizzard apparently will spend more time on for HotS single player zerg campaign, and the supposed zerg imbalance that will come with it. and we compelete the cycle in LotV with Campaign Protoss vs Patch Terran/Zerg.
Focusing on the patch is a huge mistake. Zerg are doing well because of the overall climate of the game (I'm not really sure if 'metagame' is appropriate here, but some people might phrase it that way) is favorable to them. I don't think too many people would claim that the patch had a huge impact on PvZ, but some would claim that Z is favored at least in the late game. You don't even have to rely solely on win percentages, but you can observe certain behaviors as the re-emergence of 2 base all ins.
I can't help but compare JonnyRecco with Cruncher. Time will tell if he has more success than Cruncher.
Saying there's no such thing as 'patchzergs' is tantamount to saying there's no such thing as balance or shifts of power. These things happen are cyclical, and are to some extent in the control of the playerbase (if not individual players) so you might as well accept it.
i think its more of look zergs are getting stronger at macro and mechanics all around,Something that is basically hitting a bubble and popping and many zergs that are putting in hardwork are now getting to that level of play. This was happening before the latest patch, zergs were always rising before it. The concern i have is, that look at all the zergs rising up and playing well in the foreign scene. Where is all the foreign tosses and terrans rising up and placing well in tournaments? While some could argue feast and fraer for example, but they are no where near the results of the swarm of new zergs rising to the top.
I think it's funny that more or less the only up and coming players/random ppl that manage to place high have been zergs for like the last six months ^^
read on TL long before I finally registered. This is the first time in this community that a bunch of new and upcoming players get insulted and belittled for actually being succesful. A real lowpoint for this community, everybody who shouts "patchzerg" should rather work on his own play and not belittling others.
On August 20 2012 11:00 AngryMag wrote: read on TL long before I finally registered. This is the first time in this community that a bunch of new and upcoming players get insulted and belittled for actually being succesful. A real lowpoint for this community, everybody who shouts "patchzerg" should rather work on his own play and not belittling others.
On August 20 2012 11:00 AngryMag wrote: read on TL long before I finally registered. This is the first time in this community that a bunch of new and upcoming players get insulted and belittled for actually being succesful. A real lowpoint for this community, everybody who shouts "patchzerg" should rather work on his own play and not belittling others.
This is definitely not the first time.
you had individual players insulted (Cruncher for example), but you had never a whole bunch of newcomers belittled because of the race they happen to play.
On August 20 2012 11:00 AngryMag wrote: read on TL long before I finally registered. This is the first time in this community that a bunch of new and upcoming players get insulted and belittled for actually being succesful. A real lowpoint for this community, everybody who shouts "patchzerg" should rather work on his own play and not belittling others.
This is definitely not the first time.
you had individual players insulted (Cruncher for example), but you had never a whole bunch of newcomers belittled because of the race they happen to play.
Besides the fact that OP's sample sizes and general methodology are a slap in the face to statistics, I really don't get the logic behind this:
Axiom: If the last balance update in truth is the reason these zergs made it to the top, one would assume high winrates in especially TvZ and possibly PvZ (some would argue that the overlord change made it easier for zerg to be greedy in this matchup as well) while their ZvZ winrates dropped off.
This is just... so wrong. I'm not arguing that the patchzerg phenomenon is real or not real or what have you. But it just seems completely counterintuitive to me to think that because Zerg is stronger... we expect to find decreased ZvZ win rates...ZvZ winrates should remain steady. Unless you mean that the weaker zergs will rise up and face stronger zergs than they would have ordinarily faced.. but in order to argue that point you have to show in your sampling that these suspected patch zergs did indeed face a stronger calibre of zerg with more success than previously. Which you make no attempt to do.
I honestly don't think that there are that many people who are winning all of a sudden due to the direct effects of the patch. In order to hang with the very best, you can't just have the advantages conferred by the patch, although they are significant. SC2 may not be Broodwar, but there are minute differences between merely top players and the very best, differences that end up being very significant in terms of how the game plays out. I would say there are many other factors that help lower ranked zergs do well against tougher opponents, such as mentality shifts caused by the imbalance in ZvT, or just plain bad games, which many people seem to disregard as a factor entirely these days. If there's one thing I know for a fact on this issue, though, it's that we really can't name people who are succeeding solely because of the patch. I've seen one too many meteoric rises to glory to just point my finger at someone doing good suddenly and calling him a "patchzerg", something that is a pretty big insult, might I add.
On August 20 2012 11:00 AngryMag wrote: read on TL long before I finally registered. This is the first time in this community that a bunch of new and upcoming players get insulted and belittled for actually being succesful. A real lowpoint for this community, everybody who shouts "patchzerg" should rather work on his own play and not belittling others.
This is definitely not the first time.
you had individual players insulted (Cruncher for example), but you had never a whole bunch of newcomers belittled because of the race they happen to play.
Terran users in 2010.
nah back then Terran was the OP race, Toss the noob race and Zerg the no micro race, but this had a much more humourous character. Morrow got some flak for abusing reapers. But be honest to yourself:
Would have a sentence like "All these Koreans (early GSL's) are only succesful because they play the OP race gotten so much attention and acceptance?. I don't think so, seriously, especially with Gorilla Terran beasting it up in GSL.
On one side, you have the fans of the patch Zergs (ie. Europeans who are supporting their homegrown talent), getting offended because they think the term 'patch Zerg' implies that the players they support are seeing success only because of the patch, and nothing else. That's absurd, but what's more absurd is the fact that these supporters refuse to acknowledge that the patch definitely helped in their success.
On the other side, you have the haters of the patch Zergs (ie. Terrans, probably), hating on rising stars such as JRecco and Vortix because the players they've supported for years now (Supernova, ForGG, Naniwa, etc) are falling to them left and right - while several established pro-gamers have come out saying Zerg is OP.
You'll never come to a valid conclusion until both sides see the truths in their words.
Final thing, I have no idea why the OP chose to use the "statistics" that he did; not only is the sample size ineffective, the data doesn't really say anything solid. It doesn't consider several factors, such as their opponents not knowing who the hell they are, or how their Zerg counterparts that aren't seeing success play the race differently in a way that the patch hasn't really elevated them.
The fact that these guys have only recently splashed on the scene means your data pool will be much smaller, but that doesn't mean you can't extrapolate. This is on Day9's channel:
Vortix vs Supernova (Group D) Game 1 - Ohana - Wins with Broodlords (25:40) Game 2 - Daybreak - Loses with Broodlords to Mech [Thor,Viking,Raven] (31:13) Game 3 - Entombed - Loses with T1/Infestors to Bio (19:10)
VortiX vs ForGG (RO16) Game 1 - Ohana - Wins with Broodlords (25:50) Game 2 - Daybreak - Wins with T1/Mutalisks to Bio (16:19) Game 3 - Cloud Kingdom - Wins with Broodlords (23:67)
Vortix vs Supernova (Quarterfinals) Game 1 - Entombed - Loses with Broodlords to Mech [Thor,Hellion,Raven] (23:25) Game 2 - Ohana - Wins with Broodlords (21:45) Game 3 - Cloud Kingdom - Loses with T1/Mutalisks to Bio [with Tanks] (14:52) Game 4 - Metropolis - Wins with Broodlords (32:29) Game 5 - Antiga - Wins with Broodlords (36:58)
Vortix vs Mvp (Semifinals) Game 1 - Ohana - Loses with Broodlords to Mech [Thor,Viking,Tank] (28:42) Game 2 - Antiga - Loses with Ultra/Infestor/Bling to Bio [with Tanks] (20:10) Game 3 - Daybreak - Wins with T1/Mutalisks to Bio [with Tanks] (15:59) Game 4 - Cloud Kingdom - Loses with Broodlords to Bio [with Vikings] (25:53)
i think that what happened is these guys saw that zvt was their weaker matchup and they practice this matchup hardcore to get better...thats what the pros do right? practice their weaker matchup until its their strongest?
Idk, maybe they just figured out the game, or maybe they are able to commit more time to it. I feel like the community doesn't know that much about the players you listed. But why would zergs such as an Idra not have success then, if the patch suddenly made zergs who we never heard of before win?
On August 20 2012 11:00 AngryMag wrote: read on TL long before I finally registered. This is the first time in this community that a bunch of new and upcoming players get insulted and belittled for actually being succesful. A real lowpoint for this community, everybody who shouts "patchzerg" should rather work on his own play and not belittling others.
This is definitely not the first time.
you had individual players insulted (Cruncher for example), but you had never a whole bunch of newcomers belittled because of the race they happen to play.
On August 20 2012 09:27 See.Blue wrote: Post sample sizes or this is meaningless (hint: its likely meaningless).
The sample sizes are in the post if you actually bothered reading it. I can't believe you just actually posted this.
I read through the post, your "sample sizes" are the problem. At best this would be called a case study, but it's not nearly indepth enough to actually understand any change in their results. Pulling 3 zergs out of the thousands of play and examining their win rates says nothing. There could be an extreme effect and they'd all have mitigating variables, all this is is speculation albeit not very good.
Your axiom also is false, there's not necessarily any reason a buff to zergs would negatively effect the zvz match up. Undoubtedly it would cause changes, despite what you say, but it in no ways implies that they would all go lower.
TL;DR: Observational attempts won't ever really prove anything, and while I understand people's wants to analyze stuff like the effects of patch 1.4.3 It's dam near impossible to do so at the moment because of the situation short of full blown experiments constraining extraneous variables. What appears as imbalance temporarily may be a weakness later as strategies evolve, it's anyone's guess, but just that, a guess.
I think it's about time TL puts a stamp down on all of these threads... This is honestly worse than the Blizzard forums, like a magnitude worse. We aren't balancing shit, this is Teamliquid and discussing things is great but everything should be done in moderation and this is approximately the 10th topic related to ZvT post patch or HOTS.
TBH i had no idea the term Patchzerg existed until now. But there does seem like a ton of out of nowhere zergs coming into the scene and a lot of other players just flat out not performing anymore.
On August 20 2012 11:05 JeanLuc wrote: Besides the fact that OP's sample sizes and general methodology are a slap in the face to statistics, I really don't get the logic behind this:
Axiom: If the last balance update in truth is the reason these zergs made it to the top, one would assume high winrates in especially TvZ and possibly PvZ (some would argue that the overlord change made it easier for zerg to be greedy in this matchup as well) while their ZvZ winrates dropped off.
This is just... so wrong. I'm not arguing that the patchzerg phenomenon is real or not real or what have you. But it just seems completely counterintuitive to me to think that because Zerg is stronger... we expect to find decreased ZvZ win rates...ZvZ winrates should remain steady. Unless you mean that the weaker zergs will rise up and face stronger zergs than they would have ordinarily faced.. but in order to argue that point you have to show in your sampling that these suspected patch zergs did indeed face a stronger calibre of zerg with more success than previously. Which you make no attempt to do.
Is it just me that thinks its wonky to even include zvz in this? o_O;; Interesting topic though, as "patchzerg" actually popped up in my mind as I watched Suppy beat Hero in the game I was watching. But then again ZvP hasn't really been affected that much by the patch, it's only simply been figured out since Stephano, DRG and other zergs led the way.
I have no idea if there are any patchzergs or not, but like others said before, there is just not enough statistics to say anything in the data you present.
I don't think even the most radical patchzerg supporter claim more than a 10% imbalance + Show Spoiler +
ie, from 45-55 in favour of terran to 55-45 in favour of zerg, 50-50 to 60-40 (in favour of zerg), or 40-60 (in favour of terran) to 50-50
, while the most radical patchzerg deniers would claim that the patch did no significant difference. Most people would probably claim that the patch made a difference somewhere in between 0% and 10%.
To separate even 0% from 10% with any significance to speak of, you would need several hundreds of independent samples. You have between 20 and 50 samples for each zerg after patch, and they are in no way independent (maybe slivko just improved his ZvT, playing same opponent several games in each series, metagame, slump/roll, etc). So the numbers you present for these players do not support your conclusion. Try calculating the errors of your number. even assuming independent games you will see everything eaten up by the errors.
And apart from that, even if there would be enough statistics, you would have to compensate for your bias in choosing upcoming players. There have been new players popping up all the time, and the new players frequently will be especially strong in one of their matchups, even if their appearance did not coincide with a patch. So even if you would prove that a few players got stronger ZvT after the patch, you would need to compare to some random dates and see if you have similar effects, by studying the new upcoming players at those dates.
So these number here are no more than punches in the air, and effectively just another balance whine magnet.
No offence meant to OP, I appreciate the effort. Next time though, remember to check your errors. (btw, vortix prepatch ZvZ: 15-13 --> 53.6%, not 60%)
In Starcraft 2, anyone can be anyone on a given day due elements of randomness in the game. Cheeses, proxies, what have you. No Namers can take games off of higher level players. However No Namers don't just come up and roll multiple Code S level Terrans using standard macro game tatics. MVP, ForGG, Supernova are all veteran players of Starcraft this point. They've all been in GSL Code S. They all know how to handle themselves in a tournament. They don't just lose to No Namers playing macro games ZvT.
On August 20 2012 11:05 JeanLuc wrote: Besides the fact that OP's sample sizes and general methodology are a slap in the face to statistics, I really don't get the logic behind this:
Axiom: If the last balance update in truth is the reason these zergs made it to the top, one would assume high winrates in especially TvZ and possibly PvZ (some would argue that the overlord change made it easier for zerg to be greedy in this matchup as well) while their ZvZ winrates dropped off.
This is just... so wrong. I'm not arguing that the patchzerg phenomenon is real or not real or what have you. But it just seems completely counterintuitive to me to think that because Zerg is stronger... we expect to find decreased ZvZ win rates...ZvZ winrates should remain steady. Unless you mean that the weaker zergs will rise up and face stronger zergs than they would have ordinarily faced.. but in order to argue that point you have to show in your sampling that these suspected patch zergs did indeed face a stronger calibre of zerg with more success than previously. Which you make no attempt to do.
Is it just me that thinks its wonky to even include zvz in this? o_O;; Interesting topic though, as "patchzerg" actually popped up in my mind as I watched Suppy beat Hero in the game I was watching. But then again ZvP hasn't really been affected that much by the patch, it's only simply been figured out since Stephano, DRG and other zergs led the way.
That part makes kindof sense to me actually.
- A patchzerg is supposedly a player that got big not because he stepped up his play, but because the patch allowed him to beat up the terrans (and maybe the toss). Thus, you would expect a patchzerg to have his ZvT winrate jump up, maybe his ZvP, but definitely not his ZvZ.
- A "non-patch" new zerg player got big because he improved his play. This would in general reflect through all matchups, although not necessarily exactly equal improvement in all matchups.
Thus, if you see a new player that got his increased winrate from ZvZ as much as from the other matchups, you can conclude that he is not a patchzerg. So I don't see any flaw in the approach. Not sure if I would expect a lowered ZvZ matchup from a patchzerg though, but definitely not increased.
But again, the OP didn't show any of those things, as there is not enough statistics.
On August 20 2012 10:33 KawaiiRice wrote: I can't really understand how you came to the conclusion that they're not patch zergs from your "data". . . . not that I really care but the OP looks uber flawed.
I guess you didn't care enough to read what I wrote before " my data ". You'll find why my conclusion is what it is. You say it looks flawed but not why, which makes me think you only looked at the results without reading the rest.
Please read it and give me a more detailed opinion, I would love to hear it from a respectable player like yourself.
That is... if you care.
1. The sample size of the games you used are too small. Using a statistic like this
After patch ZvT 9-13 (40,9%)
doesn't mean anything when pros play more than 21 games... in a single day.
2. The patch most obviously affected ZvT significantly, instantly (in less than 2 hours after patch I played a korean that went 6 queen fast 3rd lol). So how can you note an obvious increase in ZvT winrates, ignore it and talk about how they're doing okay in ZvZ? (Also, do you know why zerg enjoyed a good period against terran? Because of the patch)
They all have gotten a boost versus terran, quite a big one in vortix case from being mediocre, but that is expected since zerg in general has enjoyed a good period against that race. ZvT is still not a dominant matchup for either player.
3. Maybe a little biased but ... your conclusions are overly reliant on these zergs ... being good against each other?
All of the players seem to do very good against the zergs they face even after making it up to the higher level. I decided to take a look at some results these players have against more notable zergs since the patch.
I can see that you're saying they can win zvz to prove that they can compete in the other matchups as well, but you're focusing most of your argument on it when ZvZ is known to be lucky/build order win based (and ofc your sample size is really small too). i.e.: when Vortix 3-0'ed Golden I know for a fact that Golden was slumping hard in ZvZ and on metropolis he had some epic misclick or bug or something which threw all his infestors away. (Pretty extreme example lol !_!).
On August 20 2012 11:36 BanditX wrote: In Starcraft 2, anyone can be anyone on a given day due elements of randomness in the game. Cheeses, proxies, what have you. No Namers can take games off of higher level players. However No Namers don't just come up and roll multiple Code S level Terrans using standard macro game tatics. MVP, ForGG, Supernova are all veteran players of Starcraft this point. They've all been in GSL Code S. They all know how to handle themselves in a tournament. They don't just lose to No Namers playing macro games ZvT.
This is not a fluke, something is wrong.
This is true folks, we can never have up and coming players. It is impossible. Code-S players are the best in the world, I mean look at MC, he never loses a No Name player. And Code-S players play in the hardest tournament in the world. I mean it's format is completely different from IEM and they play far fewer games, because they are better. And Code-S players never suffer from travel fatigue or jet lag. Unlike No-Name players, who can't even win in their own country unless there is some sort of imbalance.
Clearly this is not a fluke, something is totally wrong.
The patch helped, but only by making the match up more reasonable.
Ask yourself if the game is in a good spot if one race in one match up resorts to the same build order every single game, every single map. Ok, good, thx.
Reactor hellion expand went away and Terran metagame vs Z started evolving again after almost a full year of total stagnation. This patch is one of the most phenomenal successes blizzard has introduced. I feel originally most of the whine was all about Terrans having to start figuring out a match up, omg! Imba! We have to THINK now! Unthunkabilibul!
So yeah, there you have some filling for the "full picture".
On August 20 2012 11:44 Kontys wrote: The patch helped, but only by making the match up more reasonable.
Ask yourself if the game is in a good spot if one race in one match up resorts to the same build order every single game, every single map. Ok, good, thx.
Reactor hellion expand went away and Terran metagame vs Z started evolving again after almost a full year of total stagnation. This patch is one of the most phenomenal successes blizzard has introduced. I feel originally most of the whine was all about Terrans having to start figuring out a match up, omg! Imba! We have to THINK now! Unthunkabilibul!
So yeah, there you have some filling for the "full picture".
you mean how zerg resorts to one build for every possible opening in zvt?
On August 20 2012 11:44 Kontys wrote: The patch helped, but only by making the match up more reasonable.
Ask yourself if the game is in a good spot if one race in one match up resorts to the same build order every single game, every single map. Ok, good, thx.
Reactor hellion expand went away and Terran metagame vs Z started evolving again after almost a full year of total stagnation. This patch is one of the most phenomenal successes blizzard has introduced. I feel originally most of the whine was all about Terrans having to start figuring out a match up, omg! Imba! We have to THINK now! Unthunkabilibul!
So yeah, there you have some filling for the "full picture".
you mean how zerg resorts to one build for every possible opening in zvt?
I don't know what tournament you were watching, but I saw all sorts of different openings from both zerg and terrans. Unless by the "same build" you mean the one where they get queens and zerglings while trying to take three bases?
On August 20 2012 11:44 Kontys wrote: The patch helped, but only by making the match up more reasonable.
Ask yourself if the game is in a good spot if one race in one match up resorts to the same build order every single game, every single map. Ok, good, thx.
Reactor hellion expand went away and Terran metagame vs Z started evolving again after almost a full year of total stagnation. This patch is one of the most phenomenal successes blizzard has introduced. I feel originally most of the whine was all about Terrans having to start figuring out a match up, omg! Imba! We have to THINK now! Unthunkabilibul!
So yeah, there you have some filling for the "full picture".
you mean how zerg resorts to one build for every possible opening in zvt?
Beyond the 15 hatch, 14/15/16 pool, there's a ton of variation in the builds.
On August 20 2012 11:44 Kontys wrote: The patch helped, but only by making the match up more reasonable.
Ask yourself if the game is in a good spot if one race in one match up resorts to the same build order every single game, every single map. Ok, good, thx.
Reactor hellion expand went away and Terran metagame vs Z started evolving again after almost a full year of total stagnation. This patch is one of the most phenomenal successes blizzard has introduced. I feel originally most of the whine was all about Terrans having to start figuring out a match up, omg! Imba! We have to THINK now! Unthunkabilibul!
So yeah, there you have some filling for the "full picture".
stephano goes fast 3rd every single game against protoss (as do most zergs) zergs can go fast 3rd every game against terran whats your point
On August 20 2012 11:36 BanditX wrote: In Starcraft 2, anyone can be anyone on a given day due elements of randomness in the game. Cheeses, proxies, what have you. No Namers can take games off of higher level players. However No Namers don't just come up and roll multiple Code S level Terrans using standard macro game tatics. MVP, ForGG, Supernova are all veteran players of Starcraft this point. They've all been in GSL Code S. They all know how to handle themselves in a tournament. They don't just lose to No Namers playing macro games ZvT.
This is not a fluke, something is wrong.
Because a player doesn't have a recognizable name means nothing to his ability. One reason that a person like yourself might not to recognize a player like Vortix might be that you're ignorant of the Spanish SC2 scene. Doesn't mean anything is wrong. When Stephano first won IPL he wasn't exactly the most recognized name yet a year later, there is no doubt that he is among the best players.
On August 20 2012 11:44 Kontys wrote: The patch helped, but only by making the match up more reasonable.
Ask yourself if the game is in a good spot if one race in one match up resorts to the same build order every single game, every single map. Ok, good, thx.
Reactor hellion expand went away and Terran metagame vs Z started evolving again after almost a full year of total stagnation. This patch is one of the most phenomenal successes blizzard has introduced. I feel originally most of the whine was all about Terrans having to start figuring out a match up, omg! Imba! We have to THINK now! Unthunkabilibul!
So yeah, there you have some filling for the "full picture".
stephano goes fast 3rd every single game against protoss (as do most zergs) zergs can go fast 3rd every game against terran whats your point
Perhaps Terran and Protoss should change up their strategies to compensate for an overzealous Zerg? Or is it easier to complain about balance, where the dominant players will remain dominant and the lesser players will fade into obscurity?
On August 20 2012 11:00 AngryMag wrote: read on TL long before I finally registered. This is the first time in this community that a bunch of new and upcoming players get insulted and belittled for actually being succesful. A real lowpoint for this community, everybody who shouts "patchzerg" should rather work on his own play and not belittling others.
This is definitely not the first time.
you had individual players insulted (Cruncher for example), but you had never a whole bunch of newcomers belittled because of the race they happen to play.
Terran users in 2010.
nah back then Terran was the OP race, Toss the noob race and Zerg the no micro race, but this had a much more humourous character. Morrow got some flak for abusing reapers. But be honest to yourself:
Would have a sentence like "All these Koreans (early GSL's) are only succesful because they play the OP race gotten so much attention and acceptance?. I don't think so, seriously, especially with Gorilla Terran beasting it up in GSL.
I don't remember it being any less earnest than the complaints today. First was the era of Zerg bitching about Terran, then was the era when everyone was bitching about Protoss (MC double championship era, collosus + voidray combo in PvZ). Then an era of relative stability, in which Toss slightly underperformed in GSL.
Here is an artifact from the early days of WoL which I remember with fondness:
On August 20 2012 11:44 Kontys wrote: The patch helped, but only by making the match up more reasonable.
Ask yourself if the game is in a good spot if one race in one match up resorts to the same build order every single game, every single map. Ok, good, thx.
Reactor hellion expand went away and Terran metagame vs Z started evolving again after almost a full year of total stagnation. This patch is one of the most phenomenal successes blizzard has introduced. I feel originally most of the whine was all about Terrans having to start figuring out a match up, omg! Imba! We have to THINK now! Unthunkabilibul!
So yeah, there you have some filling for the "full picture".
stephano goes fast 3rd every single game against protoss (as do most zergs) zergs can go fast 3rd every game against terran whats your point
Perhaps Terran and Protoss should change up their strategies to compensate for an overzealous Zerg? Or is it easier to complain about balance, where the dominant players will remain dominant and the lesser players will fade into obscurity?
Most zergs are only playing with one style: lategame broodlord compositions. The patch has made this so much easier to attain for zergs with the buffs to the early game.
It's fun watching players like Mvp demolish mediocre Zergs using a variety of builds. It's fun watching Korean players totally outclass foreign Zergs.
It's not fun watching Zergs play the same style in every match-up.
+Props to Leenock, DRG, Violet, and other Zergs that still keep SC2 interesting.
On August 20 2012 11:52 ptrpb wrote: johnnyrecco feels like the most real example of a patchzerg in my opinion i guess we'll see how he fairs after the next few patches
he'll grow stronger with the patches, each amplifying his patchzerg powers.
Anyhow, I do think the OP is lacking in contributing to the discussion like it seems to. It misses out on an adjustment time needed for the new TvZ metagame=free zerg wins, defensive style zvz being buffed, and checking if top zergs win percentage went up by similar percentages to the proposed patchzergs(this would question whether everyone is a patchzerg)
On August 20 2012 11:44 Kontys wrote: The patch helped, but only by making the match up more reasonable.
Ask yourself if the game is in a good spot if one race in one match up resorts to the same build order every single game, every single map. Ok, good, thx.
Reactor hellion expand went away and Terran metagame vs Z started evolving again after almost a full year of total stagnation. This patch is one of the most phenomenal successes blizzard has introduced. I feel originally most of the whine was all about Terrans having to start figuring out a match up, omg! Imba! We have to THINK now! Unthunkabilibul!
So yeah, there you have some filling for the "full picture".
stephano goes fast 3rd every single game against protoss (as do most zergs) zergs can go fast 3rd every game against terran whats your point
Perhaps Terran and Protoss should change up their strategies to compensate for an overzealous Zerg? Or is it easier to complain about balance, where the dominant players will remain dominant and the lesser players will fade into obscurity?
options terran has to punish a fast 3rd zerg are to either play uber greedy as well or do some pressure build that, if scouted, can get easily blocked and put terran behind. obviously a lot of zergs are still taking damage from pressure builds (like vortix losing his 3rd hatch 3 times to hellion banshee). greedy play seems to work well but extremely hard for T to do something if the Z has god creep spread like the korean zergs. first option is relying on the late game, the second is luck based. Late game T is looking better and better lately but still one mistake can cost us the game. also nice jab asshole, I'm not even qqing about balance.
Does anyone actually think in terms of mechanical skill and game understanding that foreign P/Z players are just way better than foreign T players? I see people hinting at this idea, and it's completely absurd.
How about the more likely explanation: the skill cap currently for Z/P is far lower, especially regarding army control.
Z/P is not OP, in the sense that Z is so strong that the numbers are fundamentally skewed their way. It's about the ease of reaching that cap and the extent of mechanical ability that the cap forces from the opponent.
The success of foreign Z is largely due to the lower cap. Stephano himself has said that he's playing Z because it's the easiest at that level of play.
Of course the massive nerfs to Terran will have results. MVP and Taeja won so they say play like them, even though Fruitdealer won and all the zergs pouted. I'm glad Terran has become a Korean race and Thorzain. Makes it enjoyable to watch what only a handful of people can achieve. I always check into these other "good Terrans" people try to correct me on and see they have lackluster wins in online tournaments (hacking will always be an issue) and they never did anything significant in an 'offline' tournament with anyone notable there.
These patches won't matter much any longer anyways. It's all going to be madness imbalance when HOTS get here even though it won't save this franchise. I'm enjoying watching this game burn to the ground due to Blizzard's decisions. They might as well release DLC content lol. So quickly sc2 is no longer the main event at these tournaments and it's only going to get worse when DOTA 2 comes out. I would have never thought starcraft would be surpassed in Korea, gj Blizzard.
Is there a good place to list all the balance changes? I made it in a word document and it's just troll looking at it organized by race.
On August 20 2012 12:11 architecture wrote: Does anyone actually think in terms of mechanical skill and game understanding that foreign P/Z players are just way better than foreign T players? I see people hinting at this idea, and it's completely absurd.
How about the more likely explanation: the skill cap currently for Z/P is far lower, especially regarding army control.
Z/P is not OP, in the sense that Z is so strong that the numbers are fundamentally skewed their way. It's about the ease of reaching that cap and the extent of mechanical ability that the cap forces from the opponent.
The success of foreign Z is largely due to the lower cap. Stephano himself has said that he's playing Z because it's the easiest at that level of play.
If true, this is an inherent imbalance in the game. Players with higher skill should beat players with lower skill. If one race requires more skill to be on the same level as a race that requires less skill, it won't be played/seen/win with any frequency. Either the race that requires more skill needs to scale exponentially to the point where is just hands down dominants everything else, or there will be no point to playing something that requires more to achieve what others are doing for less.
For an example, Marvel vs Capcom 2 is a game with about 6 actually playable characters in it. The best characters being Sentinel and Magneto. The difference is that Sentinel is used on nearly every competitive team because he is much easier to pick up and learn than Magneto. Much more work is required to use Magneto at full effectivness (hours of practicing ROM infinites ughhh), therefore, their are competitive teams without Magneto. The person who puts in the work with Magneto stands a much better chance against non-Magneto teams, because he is just that powerful.
All I get from this post is. ZERG IMBA NERF NERF NERF What has really changed? Just the queen GROUND range. Its still 5 damage per poke.
Those players mentioned within the OP are pro players within europe. They're not really that big on starcraft there so they may not have as much exposure. They have been competing in Dreamhacks but haven't gotten to the top.
On August 20 2012 12:11 architecture wrote: Does anyone actually think in terms of mechanical skill and game understanding that foreign P/Z players are just way better than foreign T players? I see people hinting at this idea, and it's completely absurd.
How about the more likely explanation: the skill cap currently for Z/P is far lower, especially regarding army control.
Z/P is not OP, in the sense that Z is so strong that the numbers are fundamentally skewed their way. It's about the ease of reaching that cap and the extent of mechanical ability that the cap forces from the opponent.
The success of foreign Z is largely due to the lower cap. Stephano himself has said that he's playing Z because it's the easiest at that level of play.
Never once crossed your mind that more Korean players choose to play Terran, while more foreigners choose Protoss and Zerg?
Or it could be the explanation that makes you feel better about being shit. You know, like most people tend to choose when their precious ego is at risk.
On August 20 2012 11:44 Kontys wrote: The patch helped, but only by making the match up more reasonable.
Ask yourself if the game is in a good spot if one race in one match up resorts to the same build order every single game, every single map. Ok, good, thx.
Reactor hellion expand went away and Terran metagame vs Z started evolving again after almost a full year of total stagnation. This patch is one of the most phenomenal successes blizzard has introduced. I feel originally most of the whine was all about Terrans having to start figuring out a match up, omg! Imba! We have to THINK now! Unthunkabilibul!
So yeah, there you have some filling for the "full picture".
Then shouldn't it bother you that pretty much every ZvT is mass queens -> hive rush? Reactor hellion expand was just an opening. This is how entire games are played now. It's painful to both play and watch.
On August 20 2012 12:17 BioRH wrote: All I get from this post is. ZERG IMBA NERF NERF NERF What has really changed? Just the queen GROUND range. Its still 5 damage per poke.
Those players mentioned within the OP are pro players within europe. They're not really that big on starcraft there so they may not have as much exposure. They have been competing in Dreamhacks but haven't gotten to the top.
Range is one of the most powerful stats in any strategy game. 3->5 has huge effects especially since it changes harass/poke potential.
So much flawed logic from all these (mainly) Terran players. Consider ONE thing at the very least.. How come, Idra, Dimaga, TLO, Nestea, DRG, Leenoch, Sheth etc. etc. etc. etc. .. This is especially valid for all the Korean zergs. How come they are not facerolling everything after this latest patch?
People struggle so much with change that they can't accept a new name doing well, and they oversee even facts as obvious as the tons of top zergs that underperform after this magical patch in the frenzy to diminish what the up and commers are accomplishing.
On August 20 2012 12:11 architecture wrote: Does anyone actually think in terms of mechanical skill and game understanding that foreign P/Z players are just way better than foreign T players? I see people hinting at this idea, and it's completely absurd.
How about the more likely explanation: the skill cap currently for Z/P is far lower, especially regarding army control.
Z/P is not OP, in the sense that Z is so strong that the numbers are fundamentally skewed their way. It's about the ease of reaching that cap and the extent of mechanical ability that the cap forces from the opponent.
The success of foreign Z is largely due to the lower cap. Stephano himself has said that he's playing Z because it's the easiest at that level of play.
If true, this is an inherent imbalance in the game. Players with higher skill should beat players with lower skill. If one race requires more skill to be on the same level as a race that requires less skill, it won't be played/seen/win with any frequency. Either the race that requires more skill needs to scale exponentially to the point where is just hands down dominants everything else, or there will be no point to playing something that requires more to achieve what others are doing for less.
1. My point is that there's not necessarily an imbalance. Everyone has seen how strong topend T is. If the theoretical maximum for one race is 90, and for another 100, but it's very very hard to get there, which would you play? Things like, the conditions, the map, the matchup, all come into effect whether or not 100 can be hit that day.
2. People aren't purely rational. Would most foreign T see more success as Z, possibly P? Probably. But if you have to train 8+ hours a day, wouldn't you want to spend the time on something you enjoy? If you enjoy T more than Z, though you would have a better shot at tournament results, which would you do?
On August 20 2012 12:21 BBMorti wrote: So much flawed logic from all these (mainly) Terran players. Consider ONE thing at the very least.. How come, Idra, Dimaga, TLO, Nestea, DRG, Leenoch, Sheth etc. etc. etc. etc. .. This is especially valid for all the Korean zergs. How come they are not facerolling everything after this latest patch?
People struggle so much with change that they can't accept a new name doing well, and they oversee even facts as obvious as the tons of top zergs that underperform after this magical patch in the frenzy to diminish what the up and commers are accomplishing.
Boggles the mind.
The balance of Starcraft is maybe fine at the pro level. Doesn't mean the other 99% of Terran players aren't struggling. It would be unwise of Blizzard to not look into something a third of their player base is upset about.
On August 20 2012 12:11 architecture wrote: Does anyone actually think in terms of mechanical skill and game understanding that foreign P/Z players are just way better than foreign T players? I see people hinting at this idea, and it's completely absurd.
How about the more likely explanation: the skill cap currently for Z/P is far lower, especially regarding army control.
Z/P is not OP, in the sense that Z is so strong that the numbers are fundamentally skewed their way. It's about the ease of reaching that cap and the extent of mechanical ability that the cap forces from the opponent.
The success of foreign Z is largely due to the lower cap. Stephano himself has said that he's playing Z because it's the easiest at that level of play.
I remember some scary foreign Terrans that pushed top BW pros to the limit. These bad a mofos like Androide (troll savior), Advokate (troll jaedong), strelok, Phoenix. Kas sounds like an oldschool BW player but I don't remember.
P and Zs that smashed BW pros heads in Mondragon, Draco (rape Midas), Fisheye (kinda in the boxer/yellow era if that counts), PJ (raped savior pvz bo3 and savior said it was his lowest point T_T), Legend and a few others I probably can't remember.
To think sc2 made all the good scary foreign Terrans disappear is absurd but only King Thorzain stands as the lone Nordic man. (he tall too)
On August 20 2012 12:11 architecture wrote: Does anyone actually think in terms of mechanical skill and game understanding that foreign P/Z players are just way better than foreign T players? I see people hinting at this idea, and it's completely absurd.
How about the more likely explanation: the skill cap currently for Z/P is far lower, especially regarding army control.
Z/P is not OP, in the sense that Z is so strong that the numbers are fundamentally skewed their way. It's about the ease of reaching that cap and the extent of mechanical ability that the cap forces from the opponent.
The success of foreign Z is largely due to the lower cap. Stephano himself has said that he's playing Z because it's the easiest at that level of play.
Never once crossed your mind that more Korean players choose to play Terran, while more foreigners choose Protoss and Zerg?
Nah, he's right. The mechanical skill and game understanding required is far lower for Z/P than required for T. But, I don't think this has anything to do with true balance. I'd love to see someone at DRG's skill level when he was in his prime in this current metagame play against Taeja's current TvZ. I think it would actually prove that we have no fucking clue what balance is in Sc2. I think this nonsense about "patchzergs" is just the fact that zerg is far easier at the level jreeco, vortix, sortof, supernova are at. Don't misunderstand me though. The time it took jreeco, vortix, and sortof to reach this skill level took almost no time to reach the level supernova is at. This is just the skill cap of Z and T. Is the skill cap of Z and T imba? Probably. Is ZvT truly imba? Who really knows. Until we have Taeja improve his macro and play against a truly beast zerg, we won't see if the matchup is balanced.
On August 20 2012 11:44 Kontys wrote: The patch helped, but only by making the match up more reasonable.
Ask yourself if the game is in a good spot if one race in one match up resorts to the same build order every single game, every single map. Ok, good, thx.
Reactor hellion expand went away and Terran metagame vs Z started evolving again after almost a full year of total stagnation. This patch is one of the most phenomenal successes blizzard has introduced. I feel originally most of the whine was all about Terrans having to start figuring out a match up, omg! Imba! We have to THINK now! Unthunkabilibul!
So yeah, there you have some filling for the "full picture".
stephano goes fast 3rd every single game against protoss (as do most zergs) zergs can go fast 3rd every game against terran whats your point
Perhaps Terran and Protoss should change up their strategies to compensate for an overzealous Zerg? Or is it easier to complain about balance, where the dominant players will remain dominant and the lesser players will fade into obscurity?
also nice jab asshole, I'm not even qqing about balance.
Here is your direct quote:
stephano goes fast 3rd every single game against protoss (as do most zergs) zergs can go fast 3rd every game against terran whats your point
If you aren't getting snippy about Zerg what the fuck are you insinuating? There is why the top tier are top tier, they practice. They adapt. They train. They prepare. They do many things, aside from complaining.
Also, nice job with the name calling. While I may succumb to your prowess of Starcraft at least I can rest in repose knowing that I'm not one of the many dicks out there on the internet.
On August 20 2012 12:12 Instigata wrote: Of course the massive nerfs to Terran will have results. MVP and Taeja won so they say play like them, even though Fruitdealer won and all the zergs pouted. I'm glad Terran has become a Korean race and Thorzain. Makes it enjoyable to watch what only a handful of people can achieve. I always check into these other "good Terrans" people try to correct me on and see they have lackluster wins in online tournaments (hacking will always be an issue) and they never did anything significant in an 'offline' tournament with anyone notable there.
These patches won't matter much any longer anyways. It's all going to be madness imbalance when HOTS get here even though it won't save this franchise. I'm enjoying watching this game burn to the ground due to Blizzard's decisions. They might as well release DLC content lol. So quickly sc2 is no longer the main event at these tournaments and it's only going to get worse when DOTA 2 comes out. I would have never thought starcraft would be surpassed in Korea, gj Blizzard.
Is there a good place to list all the balance changes? I made it in a word document and it's just troll looking at it organized by race.
Why do you even care about what Terran is to Koreans and these "good Terrans" or whatever and making a list of balance changes when you enjoy the game burning to the ground?
On August 20 2012 12:11 architecture wrote: Does anyone actually think in terms of mechanical skill and game understanding that foreign P/Z players are just way better than foreign T players? I see people hinting at this idea, and it's completely absurd.
How about the more likely explanation: the skill cap currently for Z/P is far lower, especially regarding army control.
Z/P is not OP, in the sense that Z is so strong that the numbers are fundamentally skewed their way. It's about the ease of reaching that cap and the extent of mechanical ability that the cap forces from the opponent.
The success of foreign Z is largely due to the lower cap. Stephano himself has said that he's playing Z because it's the easiest at that level of play.
If true, this is an inherent imbalance in the game. Players with higher skill should beat players with lower skill. If one race requires more skill to be on the same level as a race that requires less skill, it won't be played/seen/win with any frequency. Either the race that requires more skill needs to scale exponentially to the point where is just hands down dominants everything else, or there will be no point to playing something that requires more to achieve what others are doing for less.
1. My point is that there's not necessarily an imbalance. Everyone has seen how strong topend T is. If the theoretical maximum for one race is 90, and for another 100, but it's very very hard to get there, which would you play? Things like, the conditions, the map, the matchup, all come into effect whether or not 100 can be hit that day.
2. People aren't purely rational. Would most foreign T see more success as Z, possibly P? Probably. But if you have to train 8+ hours a day, wouldn't you want to spend the time on something you enjoy? If you enjoy T more than Z, though you would have a better shot at tournament results, which would you do?
I edited an analogy into my post that you might want to look at. It really clarifies my point.
On August 20 2012 11:44 Kontys wrote: The patch helped, but only by making the match up more reasonable.
Ask yourself if the game is in a good spot if one race in one match up resorts to the same build order every single game, every single map. Ok, good, thx.
Reactor hellion expand went away and Terran metagame vs Z started evolving again after almost a full year of total stagnation. This patch is one of the most phenomenal successes blizzard has introduced. I feel originally most of the whine was all about Terrans having to start figuring out a match up, omg! Imba! We have to THINK now! Unthunkabilibul!
So yeah, there you have some filling for the "full picture".
stephano goes fast 3rd every single game against protoss (as do most zergs) zergs can go fast 3rd every game against terran whats your point
Perhaps Terran and Protoss should change up their strategies to compensate for an overzealous Zerg? Or is it easier to complain about balance, where the dominant players will remain dominant and the lesser players will fade into obscurity?
also nice jab asshole, I'm not even qqing about balance.
stephano goes fast 3rd every single game against protoss (as do most zergs) zergs can go fast 3rd every game against terran whats your point
If you aren't getting snippy about Zerg what the fuck are you insinuating? There is why the top tier are top tier, they practice. They adapt. They train. They prepare. They do many things, aside from complaining.
Also, nice job with the name calling. While I may succumb to your prowess of Starcraft at least I can rest in repose knowing that I'm not one of the many dicks out there on the internet.
Teslas - "Ask yourself if the game is in a good spot if one race in one match up resorts to the same build order every single game, every single map. Ok, good, thx."
He is merely responding to this. Zergs like Stephano do EXACTLY that nowadays. Same build order every single game, every single map. Not balance whine. Just a simple response.
On August 20 2012 11:44 Kontys wrote: The patch helped, but only by making the match up more reasonable.
Ask yourself if the game is in a good spot if one race in one match up resorts to the same build order every single game, every single map. Ok, good, thx.
Reactor hellion expand went away and Terran metagame vs Z started evolving again after almost a full year of total stagnation. This patch is one of the most phenomenal successes blizzard has introduced. I feel originally most of the whine was all about Terrans having to start figuring out a match up, omg! Imba! We have to THINK now! Unthunkabilibul!
So yeah, there you have some filling for the "full picture".
stephano goes fast 3rd every single game against protoss (as do most zergs) zergs can go fast 3rd every game against terran whats your point
Perhaps Terran and Protoss should change up their strategies to compensate for an overzealous Zerg? Or is it easier to complain about balance, where the dominant players will remain dominant and the lesser players will fade into obscurity?
also nice jab asshole, I'm not even qqing about balance.
stephano goes fast 3rd every single game against protoss (as do most zergs) zergs can go fast 3rd every game against terran whats your point
If you aren't getting snippy about Zerg what the fuck are you insinuating? There is why the top tier are top tier, they practice. They adapt. They train. They prepare. They do many things, aside from complaining.
Also, nice job with the name calling. While I may succumb to your prowess of Starcraft at least I can rest in repose knowing that I'm not one of the many dicks out there on the internet.
His point is, whatever P and T does, Zerg can do whatever he wants to. Its true.
Thank you OP for the effort and time you put in writing this thread. I have to say the patch has certainly helped zergs. But we may also need more data and time for the metagame to develop and others to react properly to the patch with zerg.
I understand your point, I don't know if it should be changed.
But, I do think people should recognize it for it is. The only change I think that would be necessary, and that is largely coming with HOTS is:
1. Z will be a lot more micro intensive with "lurkers" and dark swarm. 2. P will become the aggressor in PvT and be forced to multiprong to split the mech army.
On August 20 2012 12:30 architecture wrote: I understand your point, I don't know if it should be changed.
But, I do think people should recognize it for it is. The only change I think that would be necessary, and that is largely coming with HOTS is:
1. Z will be a lot more micro intensive with "lurkers" and dark swarm. 2. P will become the aggressor in PvT and be forced to multiprong to split the mech army.
Zerg will not become more micro intensive because of Swarm Hosts and Vipers unless there is a reason for them not to continue their passive rush to Brood Lord/Infestor unhindered plan that is currently working so well.
On August 20 2012 12:26 architecture wrote: Are you joking?
None of those players are relevant in modern BW.
No foreign players are relevant in modern BW. The guys I mentioned were the last ones before all foreigners pretty much quit BW. These were the Stephano, Naniwa, Thorzain of their times, when taking a game off a BW pro was rare and taking a series was front page worthy. I'm just saying I can name multiple players for each race that achieved similar results in BW.
Now in sc2 its some zergs, Naniwa and sometimes 4 gaters that make a deep run, and Thorzain. I don't mind it though, I like seeing Thorzain's crisp mechanics that are equal to his Korean counterparts.
1. I suspect that the 13 range nexus cannon is going to destroy a lot of bio's viability. Bio has the ability to make some big damage in a 10-14m window, but if that gets sealed because of getting slowed down by oracle + pressure denied by cannon, then there's not really a good reason to field such an army.
So I think mech will be forced.
2. I'm not quite sure what to think of TvZ. I wonder if the new hellion will replace the marine - I suspect hellions will be very strong against linginfestor. It comes down to what the relationship between mines and mutas are. Obviously they had something in mind when they let mines attach to air (muta/oracle/phoenix). If the additional beef + aoe from the hellions/mines is significant enough, then that's what would force gas being spent on host+swarm.
Of course there are patch zergs, the balance patch is essentially a buff to zerg and nothing to terran and protoss. Holding all else constant, a lesser zerg will now be more likely to defeat an equally lesser terran. The fact that so many low profile zergs appeared in the IEM that managed to get past the known foreigner terran that are actually good like Kas or Demuslim is indicative of the patch's effect on zerg players.
Edit: The way Vortix ran multiple infestors into siege tanks and the 4th game vs immvp is disgusting, how did he even get to the finals.
I knew of all of these zergs before the patch. I'm a terran and I fucking hate TvZ and I don't think there are patch zergs. Look at Vortix's fricking stats he had awesome stats even before. Also, each of these players were consistently in top 50 ladder.
If there are patchzerg, conversely there are patchterran, whose winrates have sunk faster than a supply depot lowering. Namely a lot of regular people on ladder, such as myself. :D
sLivko is not at all a patch zerg, he has been a badass for a while. and who cares, anyways. they adapted to a change in the game and they went with it as an advantage, it just shows that those who have been good for a while and are struggling haven't fully adapted to said changes. but sLivko needs to be off this list. thanks.
I feel like all of these players were on the upswing before the patch but only splashed later. What do we call Taeja? Antipatchterran? or seed? Patchtoss? 3 players playing well is not evidence of a patchzerg in the least.
"Patchzerg" is frankly insulting to a lot of players who have been working incredibly hard to improve. They don't deserve it and I wish the community was above this kind of bs. But it's not.
On August 20 2012 13:19 IPA wrote: "Patchzerg" is frankly insulting to a lot of players who have been working incredibly hard to improve. They don't deserve it and I wish the community was above this kind of bs. But it's not.
Actually, if this thread wasn't created, a lot wouldn't even know what "patchzergs" are. I question the real motives of the OP.
On August 20 2012 09:18 nkr wrote: - What is a so called "patchzerg" ?
A zerg who only started making a splash in the scene after patch 1.4.3 balance changes (patch notes), released the tenth of may 2012, implying that this zerg only is where he is at due to the patch, and the supposed zerg imbalance that comes with it.
- Are patchzergs real, or are they just a figment of our imagination?
Axiom: If the last balance update in truth is the reason these zergs made it to the top, one would assume high winrates in especially TvZ and possibly PvZ (some would argue that the overlord change made it easier for zerg to be greedy in this matchup as well) while their ZvZ winrates dropped off.
Why? Well we can safely assume that the balance in ZvZ was not affected by this or any previous patch, and while getting further in tournaments, they will now face the better pre-patch zergs. If these zergs in truth got to where they are because of the patch, they should lose more of these matches. ---snip---
I think there is a very big fallacy in the original post, one that I'm afraid cannot be so easily overcome unless we come up with some way to quantify and factor in player skill.
The way to see if a player is a so called "patch-zerg", is to not just collect raw win-percentage data like you did, but also to record the change in win percentage while keeping the relative skill level of the opponents as a constant. For example a 50% win-rate vs Euro GM terrans in Playhems and MLG qualifiers, cannot be directly compared to a 65% win rate vs a collection of pro players that includes absolutely top class Terrans and Protoss including Code S players in a big tournament like IEM.
So in essence I strongly feel that the latest patches (and metagame changes), have led to the surge of a lot of new zerg "talents", while there have been no new notable players from other races coming out of Europe recently.
Players that were already getting good use out of mass queen builds and actually had enough of a brain to simcity against hellion runbys didn't really get a bonus out of this patch, but players like JR (and, imo, Vortix but he's debatable) weren't getting the max out of their queens and with the buff got a big bonus to their earlygame survival rates. Thus, they are able to get to the blord/infestor deathball that is really hard to deal with if you aren't MVP, and then win more because not everybody is MVP...
On August 20 2012 09:18 nkr wrote: - What is a so called "patchzerg" ?
A zerg who only started making a splash in the scene after patch 1.4.3 balance changes (patch notes), released the tenth of may 2012, implying that this zerg only is where he is at due to the patch, and the supposed zerg imbalance that comes with it.
- Are patchzergs real, or are they just a figment of our imagination?
Axiom: If the last balance update in truth is the reason these zergs made it to the top, one would assume high winrates in especially TvZ and possibly PvZ (some would argue that the overlord change made it easier for zerg to be greedy in this matchup as well) while their ZvZ winrates dropped off.
Why? Well we can safely assume that the balance in ZvZ was not affected by this or any previous patch, and while getting further in tournaments, they will now face the better pre-patch zergs. If these zergs in truth got to where they are because of the patch, they should lose more of these matches. ---snip---
I think there is a very big fallacy in the original post, one that I'm afraid cannot be so easily overcome unless we come up with some way to quantify and factor in player skill.
The way to see if a player is a so called "patch-zerg", is to not just collect raw win-percentage data like you did, but also to record the change in win percentage while keeping the relative skill level of the opponents as a constant. For example a 50% win-rate vs Euro GM terrans in Playhems and MLG qualifiers, cannot be directly compared to a 65% win rate vs a collection of pro players that includes absolutely top class Terrans and Protoss including Code S players in a big tournament like IEM.
So in essence I strongly feel that the latest patches (and metagame changes), have led to the surge of a lot of new zerg "talents", while there have been no new notable players from other races coming out of Europe recently.
This.
Silly flawed statistic spreading misinformation on TL since most people won't bother reading responses like piledriver's.
So I've looked through the OP's comments and I've noticed that he is addressing questions of his statistics/numbers. This isn't nearly as important as addressing the point brought up by others that the strength of certain playstyles in ZvZ have been affected by the patch. Conclusions based on great statistics/numbers and bad assumptions are not great conclusions.
On August 20 2012 13:12 vultdylan wrote: sLivko is not at all a patch zerg, he has been a badass for a while. and who cares, anyways. they adapted to a change in the game and they went with it as an advantage, it just shows that those who have been good for a while and are struggling haven't fully adapted to said changes. but sLivko needs to be off this list. thanks.
I know eh, glad Nerchio didnt end up on the list. Patchzerg or not, part of being good at sc2 is being good at it at the stage its at (current patch) and not only being hypothetically good in 10 years time when there's no longer any balance changes.
Probably a well intentioned thread but why should we add to the current whining over Zerg with this. It is bad enough everyone says Zerg IMBA (including Violet).
The one dimensional play with not much change in BO is what makes me feel the OPness of Zerg. Is like some zergs found the winning formula and everybody is just copying it with little modification. I seriously can't differentiate their play style, all brood lords push looks identical to me. All early game mass queen defense and mid game infestors play are roughly the same. They are good not because of the patch, they are just ahead in the metagame now, cause someone (Stephano) figured it out for them.
But u just can't win games being Zerg, u have to be good too. Is just easier to practice one build at a time then multiple style that Terran and Protoss requires. Zerg is not OP, is just easier to be good at it IMO, u won't be as good if u switch race, the demands and approach is different for T n P.
On August 20 2012 13:19 IPA wrote: "Patchzerg" is frankly insulting to a lot of players who have been working incredibly hard to improve. They don't deserve it and I wish the community was above this kind of bs. But it's not.
Actually, if this thread wasn't created, a lot wouldn't even know what "patchzergs" are. I question the real motives of the OP.
Agreed. This thread seems like a very sneaky and underhanded way of encouraging this so-called "discussion" and focusing attention on the recent results of these three players.
If they weren't regarded as patchzergs before this thread, they probably will be (to a larger extent) now.
On August 20 2012 13:19 IPA wrote: "Patchzerg" is frankly insulting to a lot of players who have been working incredibly hard to improve. They don't deserve it and I wish the community was above this kind of bs. But it's not.
I would not call SortOf a PatchZerg. Yes he has more achievements post 1.4.3.2 then before, but if we look at E-Sport SM (Swedish Championship), all but the last of the qualifier events was played pre 1.4.3.2, and then 1 Protoss, 2 Terrans (SjoW and ThorZaIN) and 4 Zergs qualified for the championship finals (and winner of the last qualifier event, the Zerg Forsen, had come second twice pre-patch)
And sample size is to small to make a conclusion of the situation
In general, I think claiming any causality stemming from "statistics" is not very rigorous. I'm not enough of a statistician to recommend anything, but I'm sure there are better ways of searching for relationships other than pure win/loss ratios. Regression analysis comes to mind, though developing a sufficient model would probably be extremely difficult. My opinion: As has been hinted at in this thread, not enough variables have been accounted for to support OP's claims about so-called "patchzergs."
I know that the "conclusion" was that they were not born from the patch but we all know that OP really just want to stir the pot a bit so let's do it. How come so many old zergs started dropping games after the last patch? Could they not handle their new OP-status so they had to calm down a bit so that Blizzard would not nerf them instantly? Most new badasses, from Korea or elsewhere, seem to come from nowhere (PartinG, Seed, Symbol, viOLet, Squirtle, Stephano etc.) most of them have been good for a long time but something makes a radical change for them. Be it a change of environment, a change of practice routine or a bit of both. The fact that many good zergs started to fall off and a new "generation" popped up recently points to one thing and one thing only. Players like SortOf and VortiX quickly adapted to a fresh style of zerg whilst others like Leenock and Ret started to suck. Last season's GSL was the perfect spread of race in the ro8 (possibly ever) and the season before there were no Zergs in the top 8, none. Sure there's always going to be whine from the community, that is expected when Lose McForfeit can't deal with patching in platinum but this shit has gone way too far now and makes LR threads almost impossible to read, something that was hard to begin with already...
The stats is good at showing one thing: that the stats arent good enough to show anything.
The fact that theres up to 8% difference in mirror matchups between the data points, and upwards of 15% difference in ZvP (which was a largely unaffected matchup by the queen buffs) just shows those stats arent reliable. Its both a too small sample size, at also given that people "figure out" how to beat old builds and come up with new builds all the time, someones strength in a matchup can differ from week to week.
You can guess that some of their recent success in ZvT was due to the patch, but such a conclusion is more due to the patch notes than due to their win rates.
Has anyone actually ran this theory through a correlation test? Using this patch as a factor, see if it actually is significant. I would do so, but I don't have any software on this computer at the moment to do it with, nor do I really feel like digging up the stats.
What the hell...This thread is so biased, so answers cant be different. Its not "how much" they win, +\- X% , is vs WHO they win the difference between the past and now. The 1.43 is only a little part of this, and only affect TvZ. Bad players now can survive more easily vs terran harassment and proceed to the "hurr durr gameplan of champions", inf+ broodlors and take a chance to win against everyone because that composition is silly to control, and really hard to counter no matter who are the players on the field. All patchzergs can reach the lategame, the game never ends before the 20min mark even if their opponents are better players. Every game, no matter who you are, you will reach the bl+inf and take a ticket to the lottery against vortex or hunter seeker missile. Sure, if you are a good zerg you will have a better eco and you will be able to respawn 2,3,4 times your fantastic lategame comp, but if you're a bad zerg you've at least one try. There isnt a statistic on TLPD showing the actual skillcap of the zerg race, and this is the real problem.
loooooooool, is this a troll? The only one you could pick from that list that truly COULD be (but he sure is not) a patch zerg is Sortof, slivko and vortix are around the scene for a long time and had alot of results before this... Also Suppy is a better example of this than slivko and vortix
On August 20 2012 16:36 KrazyTrumpet wrote: Jaedong is clearly a PatchZerg.
Oh god that guy is soooo aweful. If Zerg would take any skill, he would be the 18276918976489712468715479816245 worst player in the world! I mean, if Flash or Bisu just trained Zerg for a day, they would win 7289417726171264871264 tournaments per second!!!
On August 20 2012 13:19 IPA wrote: "Patchzerg" is frankly insulting to a lot of players who have been working incredibly hard to improve. They don't deserve it and I wish the community was above this kind of bs. But it's not.
Actually, if this thread wasn't created, a lot wouldn't even know what "patchzergs" are. I question the real motives of the OP.
Agreed. This thread seems like a very sneaky and underhanded way of encouraging this so-called "discussion" and focusing attention on the recent results of these three players.
If they weren't regarded as patchzergs before this thread, they probably will be (to a larger extent) now.
It defiantly is. The OP should be ashamed. The OP manage to balance whine and player bash while disguise it in a form of a discussion thread.
On August 20 2012 09:32 bonedOUT wrote: I think that the patch affected zvt the most. You can see that they all improved quite a bit (5.4%, 7.7%, and an astounding 14%). patchzerg it is!
and the -14 for zvp ? these 3 was good long before patch, no idea about JRecco
On August 20 2012 13:19 IPA wrote: "Patchzerg" is frankly insulting to a lot of players who have been working incredibly hard to improve. They don't deserve it and I wish the community was above this kind of bs. But it's not.
Actually, if this thread wasn't created, a lot wouldn't even know what "patchzergs" are. I question the real motives of the OP.
Agreed. This thread seems like a very sneaky and underhanded way of encouraging this so-called "discussion" and focusing attention on the recent results of these three players.
If they weren't regarded as patchzergs before this thread, they probably will be (to a larger extent) now.
It defiantly is. The OP should be ashamed. The OP manage to balance whine and player bash while disguise it in a form of a discussion thread.
you read the topic ? his conclusion is they are NO patchzergs ... and the discussion says along time they are so he defend them...
On August 20 2012 09:32 bonedOUT wrote: I think that the patch affected zvt the most. You can see that they all improved quite a bit (5.4%, 7.7%, and an astounding 14%). patchzerg it is!
and the -14 for zvp ? these 3 was good long before patch, no idea about JRecco
On August 20 2012 13:19 IPA wrote: "Patchzerg" is frankly insulting to a lot of players who have been working incredibly hard to improve. They don't deserve it and I wish the community was above this kind of bs. But it's not.
Actually, if this thread wasn't created, a lot wouldn't even know what "patchzergs" are. I question the real motives of the OP.
Agreed. This thread seems like a very sneaky and underhanded way of encouraging this so-called "discussion" and focusing attention on the recent results of these three players.
If they weren't regarded as patchzergs before this thread, they probably will be (to a larger extent) now.
It defiantly is. The OP should be ashamed. The OP manage to balance whine and player bash while disguise it in a form of a discussion thread.
you read the topic ? his conclusion is they are NO patchzergs ... and the discussion says along time they are so he defend them...
Well that's the disguise buddy. This thread is actually really mean towards those 3 players mentioned. You just have to look true the smokescreen
This is pretty cool and a nice way to look at it. As others pointed out this method is far from rigorous enough to say much but it's a nice start. I actually wonder if digging through their ladder winrates would help here since it would give a larger picture of how they perform against a relatively stable if slightly worse quality group of opponents.
Ultimately there is also a large problem in separating what is actual increase in skill and what is something intrinsic to the game, and it's never going to be possible to find a way to normalize for that.
your samplesizes are too small to talk about 5% changes one bad day in a final losing 0-3 could change a 30:20 score (when winning 3-0) to a 27:23. thats more than a 5% difference in the MU and its only one bo5 that changed it.
i agree that these players worked hard and deserved the good PR. i agree that sniperqueens and speedolords helped them alot.
Patch zerg is a simple degenerating term used by those who wish to blame lack of success of their terran players on the opponent who beats them. Kind of like how we like to blame illegal immigrants from taking all our jobs and ruining our culture. It's an almost fictional scapegoat, but one that terran players need to keep up morale. Because people hate focussing on their own players mistakes and own up to them, they look for something else to blame.
It's a belittling of the new foreign zerg players' achievements. And it would be rather lame if it weren't for all the zerg players winning money to stuff their ears from the whining.
Vortix just has a really odd style that most people aren't used to. That's why his winrate is so high.
Forgotten the Korean scene already? Old topic of discussion.
"Patchzergs" aka "potential new zerg bonjwas" also included Moon (ofc he is experienced, but wowed people with unpredictable wins), Byul (OK before, exploded, where is he now), Freaky(unique style, see prev), some people even consider Symbol and Life overrated too. Whenever other zergs like Monster, Line, or Golden won against anyone with a reputation people just pointed at the patch, just because they weren't winning as much before the patch...
That's what the last patch was supposed to do anyways, have Zergs win some more. No bias about it, it was a Zerg buff, that's what Zerg buffs do. That's what buffs for any race do... This one might have been more significant, but no need to point out that a player won because of a game mechanic, because it's how the game works and there's nothing outside of practicing (and sending an angry letter to David Kim when you get pro maybe) you can do about it
This lasted for afaik a notable chunk of the last GSTL. No need to cry imbalance now, we've have been doing this for a loong time.
I don't see that anyone else has brought this up in the thread...but the so called patchzergs all seem to be pretty young guys, yeah? Did no one else consider that they have simply had way more time to practice since they've been on summer break from school? I mean, being able to practice only a couple hours a day during school versus being able to practice basically ALL day makes a huge difference.
Obviously the patch helped against a particular Terran opening, as it was designed to, but I would think that maybe more practice time paying off is the real reason. Besides, Korean players have always seemed to struggle against the much less well known EU/NA players simply because they have no idea about playstyles and can't really prepare.
The buff certainly helped these up and comming players out a lot. Top tier kr terran players who were untouchable by all but the top foreginer zergs suddenly play really close games vs these newcommer zergs. It is not fair to discredit the newcomers just because of the patch though, but it most def helped them progess much faster.
I still prefer my drawing I made in the IEM thread while waiting for the finals ;d
That's retarded, Moon has been bringing results almost since he's entered the scene, barring his infamous baneling-explosion in GSL. Yeah that's right, he qualified for GSL in 2010, hardly a "Patchzerg".
I really agree to nkr. There are no patchzergs at all. I have to say, that I had the feeling there are a hell lot of zergs, which only got wins because of the patch. Especially in the ladder (i am an EU-masters terran) I got the feeling zerg would be OP. But after all my winratios are really okay. Also on very high level SCII there are enough non-zerg-players who win tournements, but there are less terrans and protoss on that level, so zerg got a higher chance to win tournements, as you can see here.
Even if this proved they were all 3 "patchzergs" I still don't think it's fair to call them that. They're playing a game blizzard balances. They're just along for the ride. I just can't hate them for playing a race through buffs and nerfs.
That being said, I can't really call this enough data, and I don't think ladder information would help either. I don't claim to be a pro-gamer, but I can only imagine that ladder and tourney play are very different from each other. So you would have to do one or the other. I'm sure all 3 of these guys will still be strong contenders in HoTS.
On August 20 2012 17:24 FuzzyJAM wrote: You might as well call Terrans who did well prior to the patch "pre-patch Terrans".
It's fucking stupid.
This is it.
On August 20 2012 10:54 Orek wrote: Definition of terms:
Patch Zerg A zerg who only started making a splash in the scene after patch 1.4.3 balance changes, released the tenth of may 2012, implying that this zerg only is where he is at due to the patch, and the supposed zerg imbalance that comes with it.
Campaign Terran A terran who only made a splash in the scene before patch 1.4.3 balance changes, released the tenth of may 2012, implying that this terran only was where he was at due to initial terran design that Blizzard apparently spent more time on for WoL single player terran campaign, and the supposed terran imbalance that came with it. Patch Terran A terran who will only start making a splash in the scene after patch 2.X.X balance changes in HotS, released sometime in 201X, implying that this terran will only be where he will be at due to the patch, and the supposed terran imbalance that will come with it.
Campaign Zerg A zerg who will only make a splash in the scene before patch 2.X.X balance changes in HotS, released sometime in 201X, implying that this zerg will only be where he will be at due to initial zerg design that Blizzard apparently will spend more time on for HotS single player zerg campaign, and the supposed zerg imbalance that will come with it. and we compelete the cycle in LotV with Campaign Protoss vs Patch Terran/Zerg.
Why? Well we can safely assume that the balance in ZvZ was not affected by this or any previous patch, and while getting further in tournaments, they will now face the better pre-patch zergs. If these zergs in truth got to where they are because of the patch, they should lose more of these matches.
well this was the stupidest thing in wc3 to call a group of players patch-race. i was hoping this never gets to stracraft community. and don't say to me that changing range on one unit makes the whole game broken.
I would only imagine this applying to mediocre zergs, not people who play in global tournaments. And if you buff or nerf a unit, it's sort of expected that the win rates will drop or raise.
On August 20 2012 17:24 Hypemeup wrote: The buff certainly helped these up and comming players out a lot. Top tier kr terran players who were untouchable by all but the top foreginer zergs suddenly play really close games vs these newcommer zergs.
Korean Terrans went 29-15 vs foreigner Zergs this IEM. It was not that close overall.
If you look at most "patchzergs" you will see that these are young guys that had school/work and improved when the summer hollydays appeared, after the "patch" lol
Jonhyreeco and sortof especially only went "pro" this summer, practiced allot more and when one to many tournaments.. it's normal that they are on the "radar" now simply because they were not competing
Calling someone a patchzerg is stupid and very belittling. As the OP said, all those players were already part of the scene. The new patch brought some buffs which made Zerg easier to play, that's just facts. Not that it's directly related to the buffs, because of the buffs Zergs tried out some new styles which are really strong. So at most they got a little push in the right direction. But it's not like those players are gonna disappear if the metagame changes or zerg gets nerfed.
On August 20 2012 09:23 nkr wrote: Please read it all before commenting
I first glanced at this thread and thought what an idiot how could TL leave a thread with such content up. I then went through it and it's pretty amazing.
The title lures in the balance whiners who won't read the whole thread and they then make some stupid balance comment where they get warned / banned.
I'm glad you put in "what we have here is 3 Zergs who worked really hard" because working hard is so rare / under appreciated in the foreign community. Vortix especially has impressed me
But speaking on the data I don't think you can really draw any solid conclusion from it based on the fact that there are so many factors going into tournament games that you can't account for.
For example look at IdrA his pre patch performance (depending on how far back you go) should be better than his after patch performance. Is that an example of the patch being crappy for Zerg? No it isn't it's just one of the circumstances that you have to account for
You have forgotten Jonnyrecco,a guy who was prepatch MASTER player,and now beats top level terrans,almost wins Mvp_Keen in a bo7,and tell me,is that NOT a patchzerg?
I think the duration you take to make conclusions is very short. "If" Z is imbalanced, to me then its been starting developing before this patch and just was highlighted by these few (but important, i admit) changes. Anyway, from my warcraft 3 experience (and the supposed "orc imbalance") what i would say is what indeed happens is: when a race is imbalanced, the majority of new talents is from that race. However, i would not affirm it can be applied the other way around.
On August 20 2012 18:27 maregemini wrote: You have forgotten Jonnyrecco,a guy who was prepatch MASTER player,and now beats top level terrans,almost wins Mvp_Keen in a bo7,and tell me,is that NOT a patchzerg?
Have a read through that, on the basis of the guy stopped school and went full time into Starcraft I think it's safe to say that he probably put more time into it and thus got better at the game because he worked hard. He's also been rated pretty highly in the UK scene for ages.
I don't know about SortOf or Slivko, but Vortix is for real. He was a beast with UD (argueabley the weakest race in the game back then) in WC3, even vs Orc. Plus he has a good training-partner in his brother, which shouldn't be neglected. In fact, Lucifron was called a patch Orc in WC3 as well and apparently proved everybody wrong in the SC2 beta. Vortix knows his stuff and that dude can play! Next I would give the edge to Slivko over SortOf, even though SortOf showed some huge results lately. Imo the change in the ZvZ matchup winrate tells quite a bit, not the whole story though bcs of changes in playstyle etc.
not only is this post incorrect when it comes to using facts because if more "patchzergs" are coming up, they should face eachother in zvz, thus the patch shouldnt affect their zvz rating.
secondly; prepatch, there were very few zergs in the topscene while other races (read terran) were dominating. U might as well imply this logic on the prepatch terrans, those who were doing fairly well prepatch but basically suck ass (too tired to sugarcoat it) nowadays, were they in a position they shouldnt be in due to tvz being imbalanced?
Not sure if troll thread or just retarded one. Saying such stupidy is beyond me. When you have new rising foreigner stars who can compete with koreans you go ''effing patchzergs they are actually scrubs harvesting the imbalance of the game''. Didnt see that comming.
On August 20 2012 18:27 maregemini wrote: You have forgotten Jonnyrecco,a guy who was prepatch MASTER player,and now beats top level terrans,almost wins Mvp_Keen in a bo7,and tell me,is that NOT a patchzerg?
Because laddering in the beginning of the season for a lot to get inside GM means you are automatically more skilled than a high masters player that defeats GM players but isn't in GM itself.
Stop putting workds out of the context,I never said such thing.It's just funny to me how in short period of time you can get from master league to the point of the time where you pwn code S players like Keen and other top players.
I appreciate OP's contribution, also I agree the patch isn't effective in making sudden gosus out of chobos. Slivko has been okay for a while, Vortix has been improving steadily for a while, SortOf I don't know so I won't comment.
Still I don't see how holding up the lie that imbalances come from the game itself helps anyone. Maybe its just the BW player in me talking...
On August 20 2012 18:27 maregemini wrote: You have forgotten Jonnyrecco,a guy who was prepatch MASTER player,and now beats top level terrans,almost wins Mvp_Keen in a bo7,and tell me,is that NOT a patchzerg?
Have a read through that, on the basis of the guy stopped school and went full time into Starcraft I think it's safe to say that he probably put more time into it and thus got better at the game because he worked hard. He's also been rated pretty highly in the UK scene for ages.
Recco was a joke at best before he beat naniwa. And what is the UK scene? I didnt realize that there was one beyond DeMuslim. He is the very definition of what the OP is talking about.
Anyone who considers this ridiculous term to be real: have you ever thought about the player? He can't possibly do anything right in this scenario. He loses and he's just bad. He wins and his wins come from a patch. So he would have lost if the patch wasn't there, or something... 1. You won't know if anyone would've lost without the patch 2. This is completely ignoring players getting better/worse or evolving metagame 3. These terms work extremely demotivating.
This is the same as (for example but not limited to): I saw someone post: "I knew Hero didn't jump in skill, it was because of all (non) recent buffs protoss got" (after hero failed to get to ro 8 twice in a row). It's the same as this case: if hero loses, he is bad; if he wins, it's because of the patch. Also the standard gom vs kespa player discussion is as bad as this. Gomtv players (i'll call them that, but this term is even rubbish) cannot win in wcs. If they win, it's logical, because they played the game for two years; but notice how good the kespa players were in terms of mechanics (omg, how strange...). If they lose, they are nothing more then old b-teamers.
I don't want to spark the discussion in elephant direction. I just want to say that this kind of attitude is very destructive and not dealable with from a players' point of view. He/she just tries his best to win.
I started to play ladder again after a very long break, diamond level.
Like 3/5games are zergs and about 50/50 terran toss, the majority of players are zerg for sure, i dont mind because they are the race i have the least problems with.
I like watching destiny/idra/demuslim stream and i have been doing it for over a year. The amount of ZvZ going on fucking bores me to death, It used to be really cool because it was always intense, but now it have become come to the level that it is annoying. You almost beg them to face a terran or toss that will do some all in or just super expand on 5bases because something different. But to the thread, yes the amount of zerg players have increased a lot.
On August 20 2012 18:27 maregemini wrote: You have forgotten Jonnyrecco,a guy who was prepatch MASTER player,and now beats top level terrans,almost wins Mvp_Keen in a bo7,and tell me,is that NOT a patchzerg?
Have a read through that, on the basis of the guy stopped school and went full time into Starcraft I think it's safe to say that he probably put more time into it and thus got better at the game because he worked hard. He's also been rated pretty highly in the UK scene for ages.
This. Patchzerg is a ridiculous term. SortOf's worst matchup is still ZvT, and ZvT is one of my worser matchups right now as well. What's the best explanation for "patchzergs" for doing well? Well I don't know about Slivko or Vortix or whatever, but I do know that JonnyREcco finished school -> started getting good results, SortOf finished school -> started getting good results, and it was my summer break -> got some okay results as well. Perhaps instead of downplaying people's hard work, time, and effort, you should be glad to see new faces in the scene and glad to see people's efforts paying off.
On August 20 2012 18:36 NEEDZMOAR wrote: not only is this post incorrect when it comes to using facts because if more "patchzergs" are coming up, they should face eachother in zvz, thus the patch shouldnt affect their zvz rating.
secondly; prepatch, there were very few zergs in the topscene while other races (read terran) were dominating. U might as well imply this logic on the prepatch terrans, those who were doing fairly well prepatch but basically suck ass (too tired to sugarcoat it) nowadays, were they in a position they shouldnt be in due to tvz being imbalanced?
name a foreign terran who did well vs koreans besides kas and thorzain
There are no patchzergs. And if there are, these are not them. What we have are three players who have worked hard and yes, gotten a boost with the patch, but stayed equally strong versus their zerg counterparts.
u write they are no patchzergs and want to proof it by saying their zvz winrate DIDNT improve? thats just plain wrong dude
On August 20 2012 18:27 maregemini wrote: You have forgotten Jonnyrecco,a guy who was prepatch MASTER player,and now beats top level terrans,almost wins Mvp_Keen in a bo7,and tell me,is that NOT a patchzerg?
Have a read through that, on the basis of the guy stopped school and went full time into Starcraft I think it's safe to say that he probably put more time into it and thus got better at the game because he worked hard. He's also been rated pretty highly in the UK scene for ages.
This. Patchzerg is a ridiculous term. SortOf's worst matchup is still ZvT, and ZvT is one of my worser matchups right now as well. What's the best explanation for "patchzergs" for doing well? Well I don't know about Slivko or Vortix or whatever, but I do know that JonnyREcco finished school -> started getting good results, SortOf finished school -> started getting good results, and it was my summer break -> got some okay results as well. Perhaps instead of downplaying people's hard work, time, and effort, you should be glad to see new faces in the scene and glad to see people's efforts paying off.
Do you really think that if a foreign MASTER terran went on to stop school because of summer or whatever, he would start BEATING code S zergs/protoss? This excuse is valuable when players go from low GM to relevant "pro" player, not when masters players start beating code S players. It's sad for the players such as VortiX, JRecco etc to be called patch zergs, but it's even more sad for the freaking korean terrans who lost to inferior players despite working harder and better for a long time.
On August 20 2012 17:24 FuzzyJAM wrote: You might as well call Terrans who did well prior to the patch "pre-patch Terrans".
It's fucking stupid.
People did call Morrow, bitbybit & co talentless when Terran was OP. Now they're calling any Zerg who started popping up as the result of a game breaking patch patchzerg.
On August 20 2012 18:27 maregemini wrote: You have forgotten Jonnyrecco,a guy who was prepatch MASTER player,and now beats top level terrans,almost wins Mvp_Keen in a bo7,and tell me,is that NOT a patchzerg?
Have a read through that, on the basis of the guy stopped school and went full time into Starcraft I think it's safe to say that he probably put more time into it and thus got better at the game because he worked hard. He's also been rated pretty highly in the UK scene for ages.
Recco was a joke at best before he beat naniwa. And what is the UK scene? I didnt realize that there was one beyond DeMuslim. He is the very definition of what the OP is talking about.
On August 20 2012 18:53 Yorbon wrote: Anyone who considers this ridiculous term to be real: have you ever thought about the player? He can't possibly do anything right in this scenario. He loses and he's just bad. He wins and his wins come from a patch. So he would have lost if the patch wasn't there, or something... 1. You won't know if anyone would've lost without the patch 2. This is completely ignoring players getting better/worse or evolving metagame 3. These terms work extremely demotivating.
This is the same as (for example but not limited to): I saw someone post: "I knew Hero didn't jump in skill, it was because of all (non) recent buffs protoss got" (after hero failed to get to ro 8 twice in a row). It's the same as this case: if hero loses, he is bad; if he wins, it's because of the patch. Also the standard gom vs kespa player discussion is as bad as this. Gomtv players (i'll call them that, but this term is even rubbish) cannot win in wcs. If they win, it's logical, because they played the game for two years; but notice how good the kespa players were in terms of mechanics (omg, how strange...). If they lose, they are nothing more then old b-teamers.
I don't want to spark the discussion in elephant direction. I just want to say that this kind of attitude is very destructive and not dealable with from a players' point of view. He/she just tries his best to win.
Hate the game not the player. They are winning because they adapted quicker to the changes made by our masters, Blizzard. Whether this is because their style was too greedy before this or because they just figured it out will remain unknown to me. IF they remain in the scene for longer than this month than they are indeed not just patch Zergs.
However, when the players start to figure out where the meta-game is shifting and adapt themselves there are two possibilities:
1) The patch Zergs continue to win against Code S players and prove they are a force to be reckoned with: OR
2) They fade into the non-nonexistence of semi-Pro hell.
The third possibility is that Blizzard makes another ridiculous patch that causes more rifts in the meta-game.
How can you argue there's no such thing as a patch-zerg? Before there was less zergs at the top, now there's much more zergs at the top. People who're in the top now, but weren't before, are patch zergs. However this does not dispute their skill as a player. I feel like many Zergs winrates started to top and they started going deeper into tournaments facing better players, thereby motivating the Zerg to play a TON. When things balance out these Zergs will probably still be around, little less dominant, but due to their now strong experience they've gained the skill to stay.
Vortix is a player I've watched in Warcraft 3 for long time, he's soo strong. But after his run at IEM people will probably rate him one of the best European players and much higher than his brother Lucifron. This is just not the case, in reality their skill is very much the same.
Sortof has shown that he can go the distance, but IMO, should not handily defeat players like Grubby, Inori, Demuslim, as if he was the clear favourite. There are many Zergs i'm happy for since all they needed was a pat on the back and they started to showcase skill, but i feel many of the not top end Zergs realistically shouldn't stand a chance vs the top korean terrans, which they do atm.
There is no "patch zergs". Only "patch terrans" that failed to adapt to the new metagame. They whine because they're less used to completely change their openings like their zerg counterparts often did in the past. Now they're starting to catch up but some people in the lower leagues who don't have the right mindset are still crying instead of actually trying to improve (avilosc2 for example, look at his reddit posts)
When Z players will learn to micro and flank we'll consider them as good players (DRG/Stephano/Nestea in mid game...) Seeing awful creep spread combined with 1a syndrom is horrible. The biggest problem is that we currently have the biggest imbalanced mappol in ZvT.
On August 20 2012 19:26 Tuthur wrote: There is no "patch zergs". Only "patch terrans" that failed to adapt to the new metagame. They whine because they're less used to completely change their openings like their zerg counterparts often did in the past. Now they're starting to catch up but some people in the lower leagues who don't have the right mindset are still crying instead of actually trying to improve (avilosc2 for example, look at his reddit posts)
I have been watching the SC2 scene from the very start. The five rax reaper silliness , 4gate, 1/1/1 , voidray rushes , proxy marauders versus P pre concussive shell nerf... I think people have forgotten the times where zergs were going hydra roach.. then infestor revolt happened. Zergs did not know how to play anything on Hive honestly. Ultras? Pff, a joke. Broodlords ? They are too slow and getting them means getting useless corruptors. Some people have changed the metagame forever. I wont talk about it because I dont remember every name and everyone deserves the credit for their work. Remember , immortal all in was possible for a looong time. No one just wanted to build that damn warp prism. People have always said it is too early to talk about balance overall. Why rush conclusions from this patch? EDIT: Game changes. Some builds change the game forever. It is an evolution , breakthroughs are important. Patch just hit together with development for a new strategy. And yes , Queen range helped executing it!
Patchzergs or not, I don't know how can anyone consider Vortix's play in IEM 'good' or 'fun' to watch. Pretty much every engagement, including his 'best broodlord pushes ever' was a straight up a-move the whole army deal, same with his 'great drop defense' and stuff. I don't really think that Z is so imba that any noob can win with it, or that TvZ is impossible blah blah blah, but there's no denying that the Z side of these games is much more forgiving, and usually very uninspiring to watch.
On August 20 2012 18:27 maregemini wrote: You have forgotten Jonnyrecco,a guy who was prepatch MASTER player,and now beats top level terrans,almost wins Mvp_Keen in a bo7,and tell me,is that NOT a patchzerg?
Have a read through that, on the basis of the guy stopped school and went full time into Starcraft I think it's safe to say that he probably put more time into it and thus got better at the game because he worked hard. He's also been rated pretty highly in the UK scene for ages.
This. Patchzerg is a ridiculous term. SortOf's worst matchup is still ZvT, and ZvT is one of my worser matchups right now as well. What's the best explanation for "patchzergs" for doing well? Well I don't know about Slivko or Vortix or whatever, but I do know that JonnyREcco finished school -> started getting good results, SortOf finished school -> started getting good results, and it was my summer break -> got some okay results as well. Perhaps instead of downplaying people's hard work, time, and effort, you should be glad to see new faces in the scene and glad to see people's efforts paying off.
Do you really think that if a foreign MASTER terran went on to stop school because of summer or whatever, he would start BEATING code S zergs/protoss? This excuse is valuable when players go from low GM to relevant "pro" player, not when masters players start beating code S players. It's sad for the players such as VortiX, JRecco etc to be called patch zergs, but it's even more sad for the freaking korean terrans who lost to inferior players despite working harder and better for a long time.
On the basis that quite a few foreign terrans are actually pretty lazy and don't try to improve themselves and much rather make posts on balance I think no they wouldn't
who are the Code S players you're stating that he's beaten? If you're saying Naniwa you should know to take that with a pinch of salt because Naniwa is Code S but his play very rarely looks Code S he played bad against JRecco that some pros noted and deserved to lose
The 4-3 against Keen should be credit to all the hard work this guys put in, besides the UK players seem to be pretty decent at beating Code S guys
Bling generally beats a Code S Terran whenever he plays Demuslims beaten NesTea and it seems JReccos beaten Naniwa and almost beat Keen
I'll throw it in there as well, time spent doesn't always equal success Stephano used to do fuckall practice look who he was beating during that time. Also Korean Masters Terrans seem to be pretty good I'm sure many of them could beat Code S players there's literally a sea of god Korean Master Terrans
On August 20 2012 19:52 Sethronu wrote: Patchzergs or not, I don't know how can anyone consider Vortix's play in IEM 'good' or 'fun' to watch. Pretty much every engagement, including his 'best broodlord pushes ever' was a straight up a-move the whole army deal, same with his 'great drop defense' and stuff. I don't really think that Z is so imba that any noob can win with it, or that TvZ is impossible blah blah blah, but there's no denying that the Z side of these games is much more forgiving, and usually very uninspiring to watch.
I think the main problem is that people are angry toward those new players who managed to beat their favorites. Hence they will try to lower their performance calling them "patchzerg"... Which is sad imo because I'm pretty sure they work a lot and definitely deserve some recognition.
On August 20 2012 20:01 Lylat wrote: I think the main problem is that people are angry toward those new players who managed to beat their favorites. Hence they will try to lower their performance calling them "patchzerg"... Which is sad imo because I'm pretty sure they work a lot and definitely deserve some recognition.
id be so happy when there would be a patchterran t-t but there is just no terran for 2 years outside of korea
On August 20 2012 18:27 maregemini wrote: You have forgotten Jonnyrecco,a guy who was prepatch MASTER player,and now beats top level terrans,almost wins Mvp_Keen in a bo7,and tell me,is that NOT a patchzerg?
Have a read through that, on the basis of the guy stopped school and went full time into Starcraft I think it's safe to say that he probably put more time into it and thus got better at the game because he worked hard. He's also been rated pretty highly in the UK scene for ages.
This. Patchzerg is a ridiculous term. SortOf's worst matchup is still ZvT, and ZvT is one of my worser matchups right now as well. What's the best explanation for "patchzergs" for doing well? Well I don't know about Slivko or Vortix or whatever, but I do know that JonnyREcco finished school -> started getting good results, SortOf finished school -> started getting good results, and it was my summer break -> got some okay results as well. Perhaps instead of downplaying people's hard work, time, and effort, you should be glad to see new faces in the scene and glad to see people's efforts paying off.
Do you really think that if a foreign MASTER terran went on to stop school because of summer or whatever, he would start BEATING code S zergs/protoss? This excuse is valuable when players go from low GM to relevant "pro" player, not when masters players start beating code S players. It's sad for the players such as VortiX, JRecco etc to be called patch zergs, but it's even more sad for the freaking korean terrans who lost to inferior players despite working harder and better for a long time.
On the basis that quite a few foreign terrans are actually pretty lazy and don't try to improve themselves and much rather make posts on balance I think no they wouldn't
who are the Code S players you're stating that he's beaten? If you're saying Naniwa you should know to take that with a pinch of salt because Naniwa is Code S but his play very rarely looks Code S he played bad against JRecco that some pros noted and deserved to lose
The 4-3 against Keen should be credit to all the hard work this guys put in, besides the UK players seem to be pretty decent at beating Code S guys
Bling generally beats a Code S Terran whenever he plays Demuslims beaten NesTea and it seems JReccos beaten Naniwa and almost beat Keen
I'll throw it in there as well, time spent doesn't always equal success Stephano used to do fuckall practice look who he was beating during that time. Also Korean Masters Terrans seem to be pretty good I'm sure many of them could beat Code S players there's literally a sea of god Korean Master Terrans
On August 20 2012 20:01 Lylat wrote: I think the main problem is that people are angry toward those new players who managed to beat their favorites. Hence they will try to lower their performance calling them "patchzerg"... Which is sad imo because I'm pretty sure they work a lot and definitely deserve some recognition.
id be so happy when there would be a patchterran t-t but there is just no terran for 2 years outside of korea
Didn't you know ? MVP and MKP are patchterrans too.
On August 20 2012 17:24 FuzzyJAM wrote: You might as well call Terrans who did well prior to the patch "pre-patch Terrans".
It's fucking stupid.
People did call Morrow, bitbybit & co talentless when Terran was OP. Now they're calling any Zerg who started popping up as the result of a game breaking patch patchzerg.
and the generally ridiculous levels of hate terran users received. Before winning the super tournament, even Polt was perceived as just another terran riding the strength of his race. Another example, protoss this time, was the state of the game right before the big fungal growth buff where protoss was perceived as an ez-mode race that could just turtle on 3 base and then 1a into the zerg and collect a win. Based on perceptions of balance the community to some extent delegitimizes the accomplishments of new players until they are able to prove themselves over time.
People frequently say bad things about players in every live report thread or stream chat and god help everyone if a fan-favorite loses in a non-mirror -- 100% there will be balance whine. 'Patchzerg' may be a new term but there is actually nothing new here. The white knighting about how offensive 'patchzerg' is only encourages people to use the term and seems hypocritical given the historical amount of whine against terran/protoss and the lack of white knighting against balance whine in general.
Furthermore, it is easy to see that if one race is buffed and the other races stay the same, then the buffed race should perform better. Currently, the last patch contained a buff for zerg so zergs are performing better e.g. 'patchzerg.' I'm sure that in the future, we'll see 'patchterrans' and 'patchtoss' now that the term is spreading (thanks in part to this thread).
On August 20 2012 19:26 Tuthur wrote: There is no "patch zergs". Only "patch terrans" that failed to adapt to the new metagame. They whine because they're less used to completely change their openings like their zerg counterparts often did in the past. Now they're starting to catch up but some people in the lower leagues who don't have the right mindset are still crying instead of actually trying to improve (avilosc2 for example, look at his reddit posts)
On August 20 2012 19:38 Kurumi wrote: I have been watching the SC2 scene from the very start. The five rax reaper silliness , 4gate, 1/1/1 , voidray rushes , proxy marauders versus P pre concussive shell nerf... I think people have forgotten the times where zergs were going hydra roach.. then infestor revolt happened. Zergs did not know how to play anything on Hive honestly. Ultras? Pff, a joke. Broodlords ? They are too slow and getting them means getting useless corruptors. Some people have changed the metagame forever. I wont talk about it because I dont remember every name and everyone deserves the credit for their work. Remember , immortal all in was possible for a looong time. No one just wanted to build that damn warp prism. People have always said it is too early to talk about balance overall. Why rush conclusions from this patch?
The patches happended. Zergs didn't revolt anything. The patches changed metagame, not zergs. All zergs did was created few new builds which were encouraged by the patches. Nerfs for 2 rax and 4 gate made zergs early greedy play a "standard". Infestor buff allowed zergs to go infestor heavy style and fast hive as well as new Infestor/Ling style. Ultra production time decrease gave zergs strong Ultra/Ling/Infestor timings and made them less vulrnable. Queen change made it possible for zergs to get increadibly fast third in ZvT which results in 13 minutes hive. New maps allowed super turtle play with broodlord/infestor.
Zergs who are saying that they inovated this metagame is making me giggle. I have seen a lot of metagame changes in TvP (from both sides, for example even the double forge build was popular before the upgrades cost change), TvZ and PvZ and most of them happened not after patches. Sadly, I can't say the same about zerg. Everything was forced by patches. And the question is, did they need those patches ? Maybe it was the players factor in the first play, not a balance flaw.
On August 20 2012 19:26 Tuthur wrote: There is no "patch zergs". Only "patch terrans" that failed to adapt to the new metagame. They whine because they're less used to completely change their openings like their zerg counterparts often did in the past. Now they're starting to catch up but some people in the lower leagues who don't have the right mindset are still crying instead of actually trying to improve (avilosc2 for example, look at his reddit posts)
Funniest guy out right here. Seriously, this guy is the most hilarious person I have ever met. I can't tell if he is a troll or just stupid.
When in the past did zergs significantly alter their playstyles? In all the months where Terran enjoyed dominance over zerg, zergs just kept doing the same thing over, and over, and over with only minor changes. Terran is the only race that has ever had to significantly adjust playstyle to the metagame again and again and again.
Zerg's QQing that terrans can bio pressure early so that they can't spam hatcheries and drones - instead of adjusting to the meta by, I don't know, opening pool first or getting roaches before lair tech (I know so hard to do), they moan about it until bunker build time gets nerfed, barracks build time gets nerfed, stim reseach time gets nerfed. Again terran has to adjust to the meta and be more greedy.
Infestor buffs: Terran adjust playstyle to include ghosts. Zergs start QQing 'OMG GHOST SO OP', but instead of taking your own advice and adapt to the meta, you moan until ghosts get nerfed again and again and again. Once more, it's terran who has to adapt by finding new ways to counter ultras, blords and infestors.
Unwarranted Queen buffs: again terran is the one who has to adapt to the meta.
When will the time come where terran gets buffed, instead of being told to 'adapt to the meta' when the other two races never have to adapt their playstyles as a result of nerfs/buffs?
On August 20 2012 19:38 Kurumi wrote: I have been watching the SC2 scene from the very start. The five rax reaper silliness , 4gate, 1/1/1 , voidray rushes , proxy marauders versus P pre concussive shell nerf... I think people have forgotten the times where zergs were going hydra roach.. then infestor revolt happened. Zergs did not know how to play anything on Hive honestly. Ultras? Pff, a joke. Broodlords ? They are too slow and getting them means getting useless corruptors. Some people have changed the metagame forever. I wont talk about it because I dont remember every name and everyone deserves the credit for their work. Remember , immortal all in was possible for a looong time. No one just wanted to build that damn warp prism. People have always said it is too early to talk about balance overall. Why rush conclusions from this patch? EDIT: Game changes. Some builds change the game forever. It is an evolution , breakthroughs are important. Patch just hit together with development for a new strategy. And yes , Queen range helped executing it!
By 'infestor revolt' you must mean the 'patch 1.3.0 fungal growth buff.'
On August 20 2012 20:01 Lylat wrote: I think the main problem is that people are angry toward those new players who managed to beat their favorites. Hence they will try to lower their performance calling them "patchzerg"... Which is sad imo because I'm pretty sure they work a lot and definitely deserve some recognition.
The problem isn't that they beat the favourites, the problem is HOW it happens. Most people (myself included) think that it shouldn't be possible for a Zerg to go a base down to T in the early game, throw away 500 supply worth of stuff by a-moving repeatedly into tank lines, then a-move some more with broodlords and win. Yes, there are strategies that beat that kind of play, as MVP has shown in the same tournament, but it's still very frustrating to watch regardless whether it's because T isn't very good at dealing with that style or the said style is just too 'noob friendly' or too strong in general.
If you watch the TvZ games from IEM, or Keen vs JRecco series from last TSL matches, sure you can tell the Terrans make some mistakes and some questionnable decisions, but at the same time, the Zerg gets away with much bigger screw ups and comes out on top. Maybe that's just me, but there wasn't a single moment in SN vs Vortix or Keen vs Jrecco games where I'd think, "wow, Vortix/Recco is really giving SN/Keen a run for his money", it always feels like "welp, broodlords are pretty good". There wasn't anything spectacular or distinguishing about their play, it was more like watching countless Terrans win TvP a year ago. Sure, some T players had a flair and class of their own where you could really say, 'wow this guy is pretty good', but most of the time it was a grey faceless mass of boring and bland play that you just wanted to switch off after seeing 1 game. At least Terrans had to actually micro their units, though.
Personally I've always felt the balance vs skill is kind of like this: Edit: This pic isn't really suppose to show how the races are balanced against each other, but rather how a middle of the road terran does compared to a top terran, how a middle of the road zerg does compared to a top zerg and how a middle of the road toss does compared to a top toss. Just didn't wanna show 3 pics
Why that is? Because both protoss and terran need to find creative ways to hurt zerg before t3, else against a player that defends decently enough, they just loose, not really because of skill, but because both races have a really hard time dealing with t3.
Basically a BL army controlled by DRG with infestors underneath are pretty much exactly as good as if the army was controlled by Vortix. Compare that to stalkers/army controlled by MC vs it being controlled by Bling. And finally compare rines controlled by MKP to them being controlled by Sjow. The difference is: the BLs would end up relatively similarly controlled, stalkers would be a lot better controlled and rines are like 3x times better in the hands of MKP.
Basically all the races need to look like terran(pref) or toss, and no race should ever look like zerg.
On August 20 2012 20:17 Zarahtra wrote: Personally I've always felt the balance vs skill is kind of like this:
Why that is? Because both protoss and terran need to find creative ways to hurt zerg before t3, else against a player that defends decently enough, they just loose, not really because of skill, but because both races have a really hard time dealing with t3.
Basically a BL army controlled by DRG with infestors underneath are pretty much exactly as good as if the army was controlled by Vortix. Compare that to stalkers/army controlled by MC vs it being controlled by Bling. And finally compare rines controlled by MKP to them being controlled by Sjow. The difference is: the BLs would end up relatively similarly controlled, stalkers would be a lot better controlled and rines are like 3x times better in the hands of MKP.
Basically all the races need to look like terran(pref) or toss, and no race should ever look like zerg.
lol, you've got to be kidding.
I agree with your point though, except for last sentence, that's too much of an generalization of zerg.
On August 20 2012 20:17 Zarahtra wrote: Personally I've always felt the balance vs skill is kind of like this:
Why that is? Because both protoss and terran need to find creative ways to hurt zerg before t3, else against a player that defends decently enough, they just loose, not really because of skill, but because both races have a really hard time dealing with t3.
Basically a BL army controlled by DRG with infestors underneath are pretty much exactly as good as if the army was controlled by Vortix. Compare that to stalkers/army controlled by MC vs it being controlled by Bling. And finally compare rines controlled by MKP to them being controlled by Sjow. The difference is: the BLs would end up relatively similarly controlled, stalkers would be a lot better controlled and rines are like 3x times better in the hands of MKP.
Basically all the races need to look like terran(pref) or toss, and no race should ever look like zerg.
lol, you've got to be kidding.
I agree with your point though, except for last sentence, that's too much of an generalization of zerg.
Pretty much exactly might be a poor choice of words, but the difference isn't really that great, while the difference in skill is huuuuuuuge.
Edit: last sentence is more about how they look on my pic. The top zergs just don't get enough fancy micro to distinguish themselves from their mid tier counterparts.
Well you're all late to the party, patchzerg are around for such a long time. Nestea ? an other patchzerg. You don't trust me ? Just look at this blog thta forsaw a patchzerg winning GSL season 2... : http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?id=163744
zerg has at any stage of the game a unit wich totally controls the match. t1 queen holds all ins and gains you almost full map control without building units t2 infestor + tons of creep can hold every army for ages till t3 is out t3 broodlord/ultra gg
On August 20 2012 20:27 kubiks wrote: Well you're all late to the party, patchzerg are around for such a long time. Nestea ? an other patchzerg. You don't trust me ? Just look at this blog thta forsaw a patchzerg winning GSL season 2... : http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?id=163744
Wasn't that the patch were ultralisks just melted things with the bugged splash damage + nerfed stim time/reapers + roach range etc ? People got a point there, because it was almost impossible to kill the zerg before lategame, and ultralisk just raped EVERYTHING with the bugged splash damage, so what's your point ?
Edit - And yeah, nestea proved later he was awesome. As MVP, MKP, and many others. But because they had strong mechanichs and you never saw so many flaws on their engagements. Terran players like Morrow weren't actually top, and really was a patchterran at prolvl. Same as Vortix. You see the guy multitask and you feel really bad.
On August 20 2012 20:17 Zarahtra wrote: Personally I've always felt the balance vs skill is kind of like this:
Why that is? Because both protoss and terran need to find creative ways to hurt zerg before t3, else against a player that defends decently enough, they just loose, not really because of skill, but because both races have a really hard time dealing with t3.
Basically a BL army controlled by DRG with infestors underneath are pretty much exactly as good as if the army was controlled by Vortix. Compare that to stalkers/army controlled by MC vs it being controlled by Bling. And finally compare rines controlled by MKP to them being controlled by Sjow. The difference is: the BLs would end up relatively similarly controlled, stalkers would be a lot better controlled and rines are like 3x times better in the hands of MKP.
Basically all the races need to look like terran(pref) or toss, and no race should ever look like zerg.
lol, you've got to be kidding.
I agree with your point though, except for last sentence, that's too much of an generalization of zerg.
Pretty much exactly might be a poor choice of words, but the difference isn't really that great, while the difference in skill is huuuuuuuge.
Edit: last sentence is more about how they look on my pic. The top zergs just don't get enough fancy micro to distinguish themselves from their mid tier counterparts.
Well, i agree compared to certain terran and protoss units.
another thing is late game army control does not necessarily relate to overall skill. Nestea for example, regularly messes up his late game army control, while being very good in other aspects of the game (I leave to you whether he is really good or not)
Edit on last sentence: i get what you mean, i just think that small tweaks can take care of that, personally.
One thing people always seem to forget, is the fact that in the foreign scene, there are many many more zerg-protoss players in general, than terran players (on all skill levels). So why is this important?
This is important because, 6 months back, there were a ton of really good, hard working zerg players that couldn't break out, because of the state of the zerg matchups back then. Today zerg matchups have clear paths / build orders / strategies, that "generally" work. So hard working people, that work on their mechanics, macro, are able to shine much more than 6 months back.
So the fact that so many zerg players seem to "break" out, at the same time after a patch, shouldn't make people think that Zerg's are actually doing so great. Yeah sure... they are doing great, but my point is if you have a tournament with 10/16 zerg players and top 4 is all zerg's, then that doesn't mean anything. I'm not trying to say the game is balanced, but trust me Terrans are actually doing kinda ok if you think how many terrans are actually out there.
Even in IEM, look at how many foreigner Terrans were there... Most of them were Koreans. So even if one day the game becomes 100% balanced (somehow, lol), then we'll still see a lot more zerg players shine in the foreign scene.
On August 20 2012 20:27 kubiks wrote: Well you're all late to the party, patchzerg are around for such a long time. Nestea ? an other patchzerg. You don't trust me ? Just look at this blog thta forsaw a patchzerg winning GSL season 2... : http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?id=163744
On August 20 2012 20:28 WeRRa wrote: zerg has at any stage of the game a unit wich totally controls the match. t1 queen holds all ins and gains you almost full map control without building units t2 infestor + tons of creep can hold every army for ages till t3 is out t3 broodlord/ultra gg
What a terrible post, clearly shows your lack of understanding of the game please edit it and make better points.
On August 20 2012 20:27 kubiks wrote: Well you're all late to the party, patchzerg are around for such a long time. Nestea ? an other patchzerg. You don't trust me ? Just look at this blog thta forsaw a patchzerg winning GSL season 2... : http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?id=163744
Wow October 2010? Didn't know Avilo was balance whining that far back
nope you simply dont address the fact that the players are getting better. Im no where near the pros in terms of skill but my understanding of what builds i should be doing on each map and why against certain matchups has developed and im winning more. I couldnt beat toss for the life of me before or after the main patches but i went a month concentrating on the ZvP-MU, i even bought coaching which now i feel is a bit of a waste of money as you can google all of the advice (although it is nice to have the session and ask the questions i get modded for on this site and be told i have no opinion cos im sub masters) or even watch a commentating stream
no. I believe as the hrs go by with these guys they address the problem over time, sure buffs help but im sure they drill their tournie builds over and over and over and get rid of any leaks, ill go as far as to say, the pro doesnt care about the scouting info up to a point, they have oiled a build against a player they've studied quite a bit. Its only the same as me in a field im good at, when i did martial arts, the opp has certain tells before he does something, it only relates the same in sc as the builds from the pros are now optimal (or are they1!!!! love sc for this)
nope patch has not created patchzergs cos when the other buffs cvome out to flip the game again we can say "patch*" and they were no good before. I sense a dunning/Kruger effect here. please recognise the skill and improvement of others
On August 20 2012 20:27 kubiks wrote: Well you're all late to the party, patchzerg are around for such a long time. Nestea ? an other patchzerg. You don't trust me ? Just look at this blog thta forsaw a patchzerg winning GSL season 2... : http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?id=163744
NesTea has been around the top for more than 2 years now, yeah surely he must be a patchzerg ....
On August 20 2012 20:27 kubiks wrote: Well you're all late to the party, patchzerg are around for such a long time. Nestea ? an other patchzerg. You don't trust me ? Just look at this blog thta forsaw a patchzerg winning GSL season 2... : http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?id=163744
This has to be sarcasm, right? RIGHT?
Well for me the second zerg patch is DRG. Notice how he started to own everyone after the infestator patch ?
On August 20 2012 20:28 WeRRa wrote: zerg has at any stage of the game a unit wich totally controls the match. t1 queen holds all ins and gains you almost full map control without building units t2 infestor + tons of creep can hold every army for ages till t3 is out t3 broodlord/ultra gg
What a terrible post, clearly shows your lack of understanding of the game please edit it and make better points.
On August 20 2012 20:27 kubiks wrote: Well you're all late to the party, patchzerg are around for such a long time. Nestea ? an other patchzerg. You don't trust me ? Just look at this blog thta forsaw a patchzerg winning GSL season 2... : http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?id=163744
Wow October 2010? Didn't know Avilo was balance whining that far back
This post really cracked me up.
On October 26 2010 04:59 imPERSONater wrote: I bet Sen wishes he knew this before playing Loner.
I don't see how the posts "You are playing your race wrong" aren't applicable anymore (as a similar sentiment was told to zergs when they complained). Terrans have been heavily affected by the new patches, however, there aren't many harassment options in the zerg early game arsenal that I have noticed besides zerglings so maybe the fast expand is the correct answer for Terrans as well. Granted I am not nearly at the level of the pros (and yourself OP), but fruitdealer and IdrA win most games deflecting an early terran attack and then using their early expo to pull ahead. Why can't terrans employ a similar strategy?
Just a week and and half does seem a bit early to be making these overarching statements as the poster above me stated.
On August 20 2012 20:39 figq wrote: I kindly suggest people who (improperly) overuse this term in other threads, particularly LRs, to get mod warnings.
[QUOTE]On August 20 2012 20:32 Denzil wrote: [QUOTE]On August 20 2012 20:28 WeRRa wrote: zerg has at any stage of the game a unit wich totally controls the match. t1 queen holds all ins and gains you almost full map control without building units t2 infestor + tons of creep can hold every army for ages till t3 is out t3 broodlord/ultra gg[/QUOTE]
What a terrible post, clearly shows your lack of understanding of the game please edit it and make better points.
ever saw a recent zvt? watch some and come back when you know more. zzzzz
On August 20 2012 20:27 kubiks wrote: Well you're all late to the party, patchzerg are around for such a long time. Nestea ? an other patchzerg. You don't trust me ? Just look at this blog thta forsaw a patchzerg winning GSL season 2... : http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?id=163744
NesTea has been around the top for more than 2 years now, yeah surely he must be a patchzerg ....
... dear god in heaven, someone here doesnt understand obvious sarcasm.... /facepalm
On August 20 2012 20:01 Lylat wrote: I think the main problem is that people are angry toward those new players who managed to beat their favorites. Hence they will try to lower their performance calling them "patchzerg"... Which is sad imo because I'm pretty sure they work a lot and definitely deserve some recognition.
The problem isn't that they beat the favourites, the problem is HOW it happens. Most people (myself included) think that it shouldn't be possible for a Zerg to go a base down to T in the early game, throw away 500 supply worth of stuff by a-moving repeatedly into tank lines, then a-move some more with broodlords and win. Yes, there are strategies that beat that kind of play, as MVP has shown in the same tournament, but it's still very frustrating to watch regardless whether it's because T isn't very good at dealing with that style or the said style is just too 'noob friendly' or too strong in general.
If you watch the TvZ games from IEM, or Keen vs JRecco series from last TSL matches, sure you can tell the Terrans make some mistakes and some questionnable decisions, but at the same time, the Zerg gets away with much bigger screw ups and comes out on top. Maybe that's just me, but there wasn't a single moment in SN vs Vortix or Keen vs Jrecco games where I'd think, "wow, Vortix/Recco is really giving SN/Keen a run for his money", it always feels like "welp, broodlords are pretty good". There wasn't anything spectacular or distinguishing about their play, it was more like watching countless Terrans win TvP a year ago. Sure, some T players had a flair and class of their own where you could really say, 'wow this guy is pretty good', but most of the time it was a grey faceless mass of boring and bland play that you just wanted to switch off after seeing 1 game. At least Terrans had to actually micro their units, though.
This post neatly encapsulates my thoughts on the matchup.
I'll take it way back here, to when Idra was one of the few foreign Zergs who would compete with foreign Terrans. You always got the sense the match was on a knife-edge, it was also one of the few times I've actively rooted for a Zerg player. With that muta/ling/bling style Zerg were much more delicate and you could actually see the Zergs working just as hard as their opponents. Likewise when Stephano was first emerging as a force, those were exciting epic games with lots of identifiable good play, for example his drop defence is always pretty damn good.
Now however, it really does appear most competent Zergs can compete with top Terrans when they're not even playing optimally, as long as they get to their strong lategame compositions. I've seen people not spreading creep well, pulling entire armies back to defend drops and they're still rolling. Zerg's lategame should be good, I don't think people dispute this, but it should be a titanic effort to get there unscathed when playing against the best Terran and Protoss players in the world, and I really don't see that as being the case anymore.
It's not for me an issue of patchzergs existing, although that's an interesting avenue of discussion. It's how Zerg standard play has developed, in conjunction (for me anyway) with more favourable map-pools, to become terrible to watch.
The whole patchzerg issue is hard to accept when Zergs who've shown good results in a much less favourable metagame aren't crushing face nowadays. I know Idra for one has better mechanics than some of the players mentioned in this thread, but he equally is pretty bad at exploiting infestors and using hivetech armies. Ret donates his hive armies all the time, especially to Protoss
Perhaps we're just seeing players who have specific skillsets/mentalities getting results because the current Zerg style dovetails with their strengths, and the corresponding boost in results will not be applicable to those who are more accustomed to playing in other ways?
On August 20 2012 09:20 grush57 wrote: Come on man u come up with this new fancy term and theory and then u disprove it in the same post.
User was temp banned for this post.
It's called discussion. But I personally don't agree with it. Such a small change shouldn't cause shouldn't cause such a big impact. I think we need to give it more time before calling "imbalance". Terrans still need time to figure out new timings.
I guess jonnyrecco and suppy should be in this to. I am sure almost every foreign zerg should be in this then, as all of them have got an increased W/L ratio after the queenbuff patch, right? -.-
My opinion on this matter, yes there are patchzergs but if they are bad the system will sort them out and if they are good, they are here to stay.
On August 20 2012 09:29 MasterOfPuppets wrote: People who complain about "patchzergs" are people who have absolutely no idea with regards to who is good in the foreign scene beyond the top 10. "OMG I don't know this guy therefore he's a noob; this noob just beat a player who i know is good, the game must be broken argh"
It's simple. If you want to have an educated opinion on who is good at the moment, you need to follow a lot of starcraft, including the much overlooked daily/weekly cups and smaller invitationals. If you can't be bothered to do that then that's fine, I respect your choice but don't talk about something that you are intentionally uninformed about, it just makes you look ignorant and foolish.
Thank you OP for putting the time and effort into this thread, I agree completely with you. On a semi-related note, this sort of reminds me in a way of Stephano back when he made his breakout, people thought he was a flash in the pan and not a genuinely talented player even though he's had absolute stomps (over top european terrans at the time) dating all the way back to april / may 2011 if I recall correctly.
I'm pretty excited with regards to what the future holds for these players, as well as some others like Ziktomini, JohnnyREcco, Scarlett etc. Always good to have more talent. ^^
This. Like said, it is possible to be very good and just have a breakthrough finally (may or may not be aided by patch). It's not like they came out of diamond league and then conquered SC scene. They worked for that.
On August 20 2012 19:26 Tuthur wrote: There is no "patch zergs". Only "patch terrans" that failed to adapt to the new metagame. They whine because they're less used to completely change their openings like their zerg counterparts often did in the past. Now they're starting to catch up but some people in the lower leagues who don't have the right mindset are still crying instead of actually trying to improve (avilosc2 for example, look at his reddit posts)
Funniest guy out right here. Seriously, this guy is the most hilarious person I have ever met. I can't tell if he is a troll or just stupid.
When in the past did zergs significantly alter their playstyles? In all the months where Terran enjoyed dominance over zerg, zergs just kept doing the same thing over, and over, and over with only minor changes. Terran is the only race that has ever had to significantly adjust playstyle to the metagame again and again and again.
Zerg's QQing that terrans can bio pressure early so that they can't spam hatcheries and drones - instead of adjusting to the meta by, I don't know, opening pool first or getting roaches before lair tech (I know so hard to do), they moan about it until bunker build time gets nerfed, barracks build time gets nerfed, stim reseach time gets nerfed. Again terran has to adjust to the meta and be more greedy.
Infestor buffs: Terran adjust playstyle to include ghosts. Zergs start QQing 'OMG GHOST SO OP', but instead of taking your own advice and adapt to the meta, you moan until ghosts get nerfed again and again and again. Once more, it's terran who has to adapt by finding new ways to counter ultras, blords and infestors.
Unwarranted Queen buffs: again terran is the one who has to adapt to the meta.
When will the time come where terran gets buffed, instead of being told to 'adapt to the meta' when the other two races never have to adapt their playstyles as a result of nerfs/buffs?
This is a example post from someone that does not understand how zerg race works.
Spam hatcheries and drones? You HAVE to be +1 base agains terran as zerge, otherwise your are BEHIND, mathematically. Thats well established fact, and zerg does not do fast 3-hatch because they are allowed to, but because they have to, while terran is building his +2 additional CC safely behinds his invicible wall in early stages of the game. How is it exploiting game mechanism?
Zerg had no viable early defense agains cheeses, before patch, and have to spend larva(drones) in case they are presured, thus, hurting their economy. How is terran hurted by making few marines and presuring with them, putting bunkers, while pumping out scv constantly?
Terran is the race that has most build diversity out there. How can zerg adopt to the meta if they have no options because of weak unit design early game? I hope hots would give use more options.
On August 20 2012 20:17 Zarahtra wrote: Personally I've always felt the balance vs skill is kind of like this: [image loading] Edit: This pic isn't really suppose to show how the races are balanced against each other, but rather how a middle of the road terran does compared to a top terran, how a middle of the road zerg does compared to a top zerg and how a middle of the road toss does compared to a top toss. Just didn't wanna show 3 pics
Why that is? Because both protoss and terran need to find creative ways to hurt zerg before t3, else against a player that defends decently enough, they just loose, not really because of skill, but because both races have a really hard time dealing with t3.
Basically a BL army controlled by DRG with infestors underneath are pretty much exactly as good as if the army was controlled by Vortix. Compare that to stalkers/army controlled by MC vs it being controlled by Bling. And finally compare rines controlled by MKP to them being controlled by Sjow. The difference is: the BLs would end up relatively similarly controlled, stalkers would be a lot better controlled and rines are like 3x times better in the hands of MKP.
Basically all the races need to look like terran(pref) or toss, and no race should ever look like zerg.
Are you even aware what units does zerg have, because it seems that you have no clue. How is zerg suppose to micro meele units agains a ranget ones? Have you ever seen a zelot microed agains marines? No, because ITS NOT POSSIBLE.
How are you supposed to micro like a slowest unit in the game (BL)? Do terrans micro their thors? No - because you cannot micro such slow unit...
You compare one of the fastest unit in the game (stimmed marines), and one of the most mobile unit - blink stalkers, to some slow glass cannon type of unit - BL.
Only units that zergs can shine with micro are zerglings and roaches, and only like in ZvZ matchup, because you can only micro agains similary fast unit with similar range, and in other MU terran and prottos ussualy have upper hand here.
Its just the unit design that was delivered for zerg. Zerg is a swarm, they are suppose to swarm their enemy, no micro them to death. I dont judge wheather its good/bad design, its just how it has been thought of by Blizzard. Zergs are suppose to flak and runby armies. Compare this apects of zerg players, not BL control lol.
And last poit -hos is it possible, that such A-moving race, I mean zerg, has comparable are often higher APM than their adversary? Are they just spamming a-move like 300 times a minute?
On August 20 2012 09:20 grush57 wrote: Come on man u come up with this new fancy term and theory and then u disprove it in the same post.
User was temp banned for this post.
It's called discussion. But I personally don't agree with it. Such a small change shouldn't cause shouldn't cause such a big impact. I think we need to give it more time before calling "imbalance". Terrans still need time to figure out new timings.
if this is a small change, what the hell do you consider as a big change? the 2 changes COMPLETELY changed the match up. Whether its because of balance, or terrans not adapting fast enough, zergs are doing the best they have ever done atm, these were huge changes.
This thread is just an excuse for every player who prefers to blame losses on external circumstances (i.e. "blizz screwed up balance") to vent their super biased opinion.
The discussion in OP completely disregards the fact that T and P had to adjust their strategies to the new balance, so naturally they lost a ton of extra games at first. Also, as pointed out a couple of times, the sample size is way too small.
Watch MVP vs Nerchio and maybe next we will see threads about "[D?]seeker missile op" and if there was a next patch, people would find something else that makes their race underpowered. If MVP and Taeja can stomp Zergs, other Terrans will (eventually) catch up.
On August 20 2012 21:12 rast wrote: This is a example post from someone that does not understand how zerg race works.
Spam hatcheries and drones? You HAVE to be +1 base agains terran as zerge, otherwise your are BEHIND, mathematically. Thats well established fact, and zerg does not do fast 3-hatch because they are allowed to, but because they have to.
Yeah this is really not true. Zerg dont HAVE to be +1 base against terran. Equal bases is very much fine for zerg.
On August 20 2012 21:24 nimbim wrote: This thread is just an excuse for every player who prefers to blame losses on external circumstances (i.e. "blizz screwed up balance") to vent their super biased opinion.
The discussion in OP completely disregards the fact that T and P had to adjust their strategies to the new balance, so naturally they lost a ton of extra games at first. Also, as pointed out a couple of times, the sample size is way too small.
Watch MVP vs Nerchio and maybe next we will see threads about "[D?]seeker missile op" and if there was a next patch, people would find something else that makes their race underpowered. If MVP and Taeja can stomp Zergs, other Terrans will (eventually) catch up.
The entire reason people are annoyed is because this isn't a consequence of Zergs discovering new things, Blizzard are holding their hands and giving them the tools to defend what the other two races have been doing.
The knock-on effects are pretty big too, in terms of interesting pressures and harassment. I play Protoss, and I used to like to do zealot/zealot/stalker pressures off one gate against Zerg, but it just doesn't really work anymore because Queens hold off those kind of small forces pretty easily.
So instead of doing non-committal pressure harassment to force units, I found that I had to rely on 2 base timings much more given how good a catch-all defence Queens can be. Just makes for a more boring and less varied game
I don't think that anyone is denying the fact that Zerg are doing quite well vs Terrans atm . But saying that Zerg is just "A+click trololol sdsdsdsds 1a1a1a1a" and that SortOf/JR/etc.. can be compared to players like DRG or even Stephano is just bullshit .
Whether they are pre-patch Zergs or not they aren't winning anything and i am sure they never will (at the highest level of play).
Looking forward to the next MLG and watch some "real" TvZ .
I actually had this thought in my own mind a little while ago, mostly because my own ZvT improved immensely after the patch (the correct way to play just became so clear to me, I've thought ZvP is easy for about a year).
Then I realised that zergs were just figuring out how to play correctly and Terrans hadn't worked it out quite yet. Well, pro Terran's haven't, my TvZ hasn't gotten any worse, tbh. I definitely think Zerg is favoured right now vs Terran (and probably Protoss to a lesser and constantly lessening extent), but I don't think it's got anything much to do with balance, the meta game just needs to evolve.
Slivko shouldnt really be there, hes had some results way before the rest. I feel patchzerg's exist but want more data that compares new terran plays success with new zerg players success.
On August 20 2012 21:37 althaz wrote: I actually had this thought in my own mind a little while ago, mostly because my own ZvT improved immensely after the patch (the correct way to play just became so clear to me, I've thought ZvP is easy for about a year).
Then I realised that zergs were just figuring out how to play correctly and Terrans hadn't worked it out quite yet.
The only figuring out zergs did was that 4 hellions were easy to hold with pre patch queens.
Blizzard still held their hands and nullified it and a host of other openings for no particular reason.
No, there hasn't been any figuring out on the zergs side.
Zergs have been doing well vs protoss for ages now. Since the patch they have been doing well vs terran also. I think all zergs benefitted from the patch but would not go as far as saying these "patchzergs" are only doing well because of the patch, they are just getting further in tournaments then they would without the patch as they are no longer beaten by terrans slightly better then them. I was really liking how this game was shaping up balancewise before the queen + ov patch .
On August 20 2012 21:12 rast wrote: This is a example post from someone that does not understand how zerg race works.
Spam hatcheries and drones? You HAVE to be +1 base agains terran as zerge, otherwise your are BEHIND, mathematically. Thats well established fact, and zerg does not do fast 3-hatch because they are allowed to, but because they have to.
Yeah this is really not true. Zerg dont HAVE to be +1 base against terran. Equal bases is very much fine for zerg.
That depends. Vs triple OC, you need a third actually to keep up in income. 3 Mules provide mineral income equal to almost an extra base (16 workers: 11 minerals/sec, 3 mules: 9 minerals/sec). I agree though, you don't have to always be up a base, but you do want to expand sooner as Zerg.
On August 20 2012 21:12 rast wrote: This is a example post from someone that does not understand how zerg race works.
Spam hatcheries and drones? You HAVE to be +1 base agains terran as zerge, otherwise your are BEHIND, mathematically. Thats well established fact, and zerg does not do fast 3-hatch because they are allowed to, but because they have to.
Yeah this is really not true. Zerg dont HAVE to be +1 base against terran. Equal bases is very much fine for zerg.
Indeed, it was true in early days of the game and in bw ofc. But right now it is absolutely untrue. There is obviously "patchzergs". Just take a look a reeco/keen games or some of the iem games. A lot of them are only relying on powermacro with pretty poor decision making, infestors micro, and creep spread. Right now u play zvt like pvt. Just sit down and macro, defend with infestors, T3 like a boss and Amove. Good creep spread, micro, flanks and good decision making are optionnal.
On August 20 2012 21:24 nimbim wrote: This thread is just an excuse for every player who prefers to blame losses on external circumstances (i.e. "blizz screwed up balance") to vent their super biased opinion.
The discussion in OP completely disregards the fact that T and P had to adjust their strategies to the new balance, so naturally they lost a ton of extra games at first. Also, as pointed out a couple of times, the sample size is way too small.
Watch MVP vs Nerchio and maybe next we will see threads about "[D?]seeker missile op" and if there was a next patch, people would find something else that makes their race underpowered. If MVP and Taeja can stomp Zergs, other Terrans will (eventually) catch up.
The entire reason people are annoyed is because this isn't a consequence of Zergs discovering new things, Blizzard are holding their hands and giving them the tools to defend what the other two races have been doing.
The knock-on effects are pretty big too, in terms of interesting pressures and harassment. I play Protoss, and I used to like to do zealot/zealot/stalker pressures off one gate against Zerg, but it just doesn't really work anymore because Queens hold off those kind of small forces pretty easily.
So instead of doing non-committal pressure harassment to force units, I found that I had to rely on 2 base timings much more given how good a catch-all defence Queens can be. Just makes for a more boring and less varied game
What the fuck man? Protoss has gotten more buffs in the past year than zerg. Blizzard patches those things, because they don't work out the way they think they should. But yeah, please go and figure out how to play 5range immortal allin and do 40HP warp prism harass.
On August 20 2012 21:35 Swiipii wrote: I don't think that anyone is denying the fact that Zerg are doing quite well vs Terrans atm . But saying that Zerg is just "A+click trololol sdsdsdsds 1a1a1a1a" and that SortOf/JR/etc.. can be compared to players like DRG or even Stephano is just bullshit .
Whether they are pre-patch Zergs or not they aren't winning anything and i am sure they never will (at the highest level of play).
Looking forward to the next MLG and watch some "real" TvZ .
See, I don't think anyone is saying that every Zerg is just a+click 1a1a1a1 and that SortOf = DRG; what annoys people is that there is very little difference in results between players like SortOf/JR/Vortix who are obviously not anywhere close to being Code S levels in their control and mechanics etc compared to Code S level zergs, at least in ZvT. It's entirely possible that the current ZvT situation is very temporary, but in the meantime it's frustrating watching that kind of play going as far as it did in tournaments like IEM which was 'supposed' to be pretty loaded with talent.
I don't want to say that Vortix or JohnnyRecco or whatever is talentless and bad - but I don't see how can anyone deny that their games in IEM & TSL were awful in every sense of that word. It's obvious that the way the game was patched has a lot to do with viability of the style of play they used, hence the hate on the patches and the 'patchzergs'. It's silly to sit around guessing whether they'd be any good without the queen / infestor patches or not (or if the patches were different), but looking at how they play - in the game as it is now, 'patchzerg' does seem like a pretty fitting name. :p
On August 20 2012 21:12 rast wrote: This is a example post from someone that does not understand how zerg race works.
Spam hatcheries and drones? You HAVE to be +1 base agains terran as zerge, otherwise your are BEHIND, mathematically. Thats well established fact, and zerg does not do fast 3-hatch because they are allowed to, but because they have to.
Yeah this is really not true. Zerg dont HAVE to be +1 base against terran. Equal bases is very much fine for zerg.
Indeed, it was true in early days of the game and in bw ofc. But right now it is absolutely untrue. There is obviously "patchzergs". Just take a look a reeco/keen games or some of the iem games. A lot of them are only relying on powermacro with pretty poor decision making, infestors micro, and creep spread. Right now u play zvt like pvt. Just sit down and macro, defend with infestors, T3 like a boss and Amove. Good creep spread, micro, flanks and good decision making are optionnal.
Yeah, a game that really is worth checking out for this point is MVP vs Vortix on Cloud Kingdom from IEM. Votix got ahead by crushing MvPs army on creep, but then just tried to 1A his entire army towards MVPs 4th when MVP had a giant ass concave and Vortix had like 3 infesters, which was horrible and probably the only way he could have lost that army. Vortix also kept sending his entire army to deal with drops, but was doing a horrible job dealing with them, he lost his pool and so many drones every game.
We are all Patch Zerg/Terran/Protoss unless you are David Kim who played the very first Starcraft 2 game in alpha stage like 5 years ago. Almost everything has been patched. Thank you guys. You are patch Terran. You are patch Protoss. You are patch Zerg. No one can escape from this.
or - the game was imbalanced - these players werent given the same tools as the other non zergs pre patch and now are have a chance to shine. (assuming the game is completely balanced.) Its hard to tell, but interesting thread.
I know that Vortix, SortOf and Nerchio were all good players. I usually check the grandmaster league from time to time and there were many times I saw either Nerchion or Vortix in rank 1. SortOf is also quite good, I believe he was gm since it first came out.
However, it amazes me that most of the successful foreign players are zerg. It really bothers me, why protoss players aren't that good? Imbalance or simply not talented enough? I would really want to know.
On August 20 2012 21:24 nimbim wrote: This thread is just an excuse for every player who prefers to blame losses on external circumstances (i.e. "blizz screwed up balance") to vent their super biased opinion.
The discussion in OP completely disregards the fact that T and P had to adjust their strategies to the new balance, so naturally they lost a ton of extra games at first. Also, as pointed out a couple of times, the sample size is way too small.
Watch MVP vs Nerchio and maybe next we will see threads about "[D?]seeker missile op" and if there was a next patch, people would find something else that makes their race underpowered. If MVP and Taeja can stomp Zergs, other Terrans will (eventually) catch up.
The entire reason people are annoyed is because this isn't a consequence of Zergs discovering new things, Blizzard are holding their hands and giving them the tools to defend what the other two races have been doing.
The knock-on effects are pretty big too, in terms of interesting pressures and harassment. I play Protoss, and I used to like to do zealot/zealot/stalker pressures off one gate against Zerg, but it just doesn't really work anymore because Queens hold off those kind of small forces pretty easily.
So instead of doing non-committal pressure harassment to force units, I found that I had to rely on 2 base timings much more given how good a catch-all defence Queens can be. Just makes for a more boring and less varied game
What the fuck man? Protoss has gotten more buffs in the past year than zerg. Blizzard patches those things, because they don't work out the way they think they should. But yeah, please go and figure out how to play 5range immortal allin and do 40HP warp prism harass.
Dual forges builds existed before the upgrade buff, I don't really get why the buff was put in there.
From my past posts I actually disagreed with the idea to buff the immortal to hold 1/1/1s, it was tough to hold back in the day but that was as much a result of the map pool at that time than it was a consequence of the build itself.
The warp prism buff was to encourage a less deathball-centric style, and to an extent it did this. However for me it's only really HerO's PvZ that consistently does this, as timing attacks and deathballs are still just as viable. Bit of a shame as I love to watch HerO's multitasking at work
On August 20 2012 21:57 Adonminus wrote: I know that Vortix, SortOf and Nerchio were all good players. I usually check the grandmaster league from time to time and there were many times I saw either Nerchion or Vortix in rank 1. SortOf is also quite good, I believe he was gm since it first came out.
However, it amazes me that most of the successful foreign players are zerg. It really bothers me, why protoss players aren't that good? Imbalance or simply not talented enough? I would really want to know.
There was the same discussion as well, when all the Terran whining was about TvP some months ago. Feast and elfi come to mind that weren't well known before. Socke and HasuObs that suddenly managed to get very stable results. I think people even whined about Grubby and how HuK and Naniwa were the only foreigners to be able to compete in Code S.
It's the same blabla from the same people, just that the last time some Zergs tuned in and described their race as "so much harder than Protoss and TvZ is the only good MU" and this time some Protoss tune in to describe "PvT as the most balanced and skillbased MU ever and Zerg is just supereasy amove".
I think zerg is easiest race to play at the foreigner top level. It doesnt require to be aggressive and find holes in opponents defenses, instead just defend, defend, defend until deathball.
On August 20 2012 21:24 nimbim wrote: This thread is just an excuse for every player who prefers to blame losses on external circumstances (i.e. "blizz screwed up balance") to vent their super biased opinion.
The discussion in OP completely disregards the fact that T and P had to adjust their strategies to the new balance, so naturally they lost a ton of extra games at first. Also, as pointed out a couple of times, the sample size is way too small.
Watch MVP vs Nerchio and maybe next we will see threads about "[D?]seeker missile op" and if there was a next patch, people would find something else that makes their race underpowered. If MVP and Taeja can stomp Zergs, other Terrans will (eventually) catch up.
The entire reason people are annoyed is because this isn't a consequence of Zergs discovering new things, Blizzard are holding their hands and giving them the tools to defend what the other two races have been doing.
The knock-on effects are pretty big too, in terms of interesting pressures and harassment. I play Protoss, and I used to like to do zealot/zealot/stalker pressures off one gate against Zerg, but it just doesn't really work anymore because Queens hold off those kind of small forces pretty easily.
So instead of doing non-committal pressure harassment to force units, I found that I had to rely on 2 base timings much more given how good a catch-all defence Queens can be. Just makes for a more boring and less varied game
What the fuck man? Protoss has gotten more buffs in the past year than zerg. Blizzard patches those things, because they don't work out the way they think they should. But yeah, please go and figure out how to play 5range immortal allin and do 40HP warp prism harass.
Dual forges builds existed before the upgrade buff, I don't really get why the buff was put in there.
From my past posts I actually disagreed with the idea to buff the immortal to hold 1/1/1s, it was tough to hold back in the day but that was as much a result of the map pool at that time than it was a consequence of the build itself.
The warp prism buff was to encourage a less deathball-centric style, and to an extent it did this. However for me it's only really HerO's PvZ that consistently does this, as timing attacks and deathballs are still just as viable. Bit of a shame as I love to watch HerO's multitasking at work
what's your point? Those patches happened regardless, whether you think they were needed or not. I could say the same thing about the queen range. It was not needed, but it happened. If they don't want to remove it, then they should try to fix other parts of the one MU that got really affected too much by it. Hey wait, that's what they are doing!
I love how the community is so deluded by protecting their own ego. There are many major factors here that point to there being severe game imbalances. Whilst I don't care for this new phrase, it really can't be argued that success for these Zerg has been elevated to some level. This does not mean they aren't great players. But in ZvT at least they are having a much easier ride.
Though it's difficult to define skill exactly in a game like this, in the most generic sense it is the ability to macro, micro, and multi task better than your opponent whilst executing strategy and making smart decisions. With the patch it is far too difficult for Terran to stunt the Zergs growth with multitasking alone so one of the core skills becomes negated heavily. Some might argue this is the most important skill that defines a players ability. Right now every Terran is playing greedy hoping the Zerg won't choose to just all in them. Zerg DO NOT have this problem to worry about, and that is a problem for the game, especially as a spectator sport. Only the ignorant would contradict this point given all of the games we currently see, results, and feedback from pro Terrans.
This leads to ZvP and some of the statistics shown. A lot of the Zergs ZvP hasn't shown incredible rises like ZvT has done. And this makes perfect sense. The goal for Zerg is the same, be as greedy as possible whilst defending what Protoss throw at them. Cannon FE is a versatile build, Not only does it have potential early game damage, the follow up can be different. Whether Voidray play, or Gateway+1 timings into late game Immortal styles. The Zerg has to have better multitasking and scouting to be able to deal with it. These are the kind of strong options Terran are lacking against Zerg. And why Zerg aren't showing as strong a climb in this MU.
I really don't question these Zergs ability as players. I believe they would be able to compete at high levels regardless. But TvZ is suffering heavily right now. And if they hadn't had the large rise in win percentage vs Terran. Then it is more than likely they would have been knocked out of tournaments sooner by Terrans who can't utilise the fact they are currently better. (Koreans especially). So they are getting more credit than deserved. Though they still deserve a lot of credit.
There is a reason players like MVP would never lose to foreigners in the past, there is a reason that players like MVP are losing only to foreign Zergs. There is a reason that all new talent on the scene is Zerg. There is a reason that more people are playing Zerg than ever. It is as clear as day, and is already having a huge negative impact on the scene. We may only hope that HotS rectifies this severely flawed balance.
This game become balanced purely after legacy of void this is only path to pure balance u must count with it when u play it at this time train + little patch help can make result ,after legacy it will be only skill , experience and train,play vs players with it.... players who will play during all new patch and hots+lotv will be strongest after and game become more less random .....
I didn't really give any thought to the whole "patchzerg" craze, but Supernova vs Vortix on Antiga was one of the most disgusting things I've ever seen.
People are just too focused on the term "patchzerg" than the real problem. While i agree the term per se is kinda stupid and offensive, because they're players who puts effort and passion, maybe more than others (who really knows), the "patchzerg" drama mislead the discussion. Simply, with a zerg lategame comp, everyone can put in serious troubles a pro player ten times better than you in all the others aspect in the game. More blizzard help zerg players to reach that comp easy and safe, more the overall skillcap of the zerg race simply degrees in a hilarious way.
On August 20 2012 22:13 Beatmania wrote: I love how the community is so deluded by protecting their own ego. There are many major factors here that point to there being severe game imbalances. Whilst I don't care for this new phrase, it really can't be argued that success for these Zerg has been elevated to some level. This does not mean they aren't great players. But in ZvT at least they are having a much easier ride.
Though it's difficult to define skill exactly in a game like this, in the most generic sense it is the ability to macro, micro, and multi task better than your opponent whilst executing strategy and making smart decisions. With the patch it is far too difficult for Terran to stunt the Zergs growth with multitasking alone so one of the core skills becomes negated heavily. Some might argue this is the most important skill that defines a players ability. Right now every Terran is playing greedy hoping the Zerg won't choose to just all in them. Zerg DO NOT have this problem to worry about, and that is a problem for the game, especially as a spectator sport. Only the ignorant would contradict this point given all of the games we currently see, results, and feedback from pro Terrans.
This leads to ZvP and some of the statistics shown. A lot of the Zergs ZvP hasn't shown incredible rises like ZvT has done. And this makes perfect sense. The goal for Zerg is the same, be as greedy as possible whilst defending what Protoss throw at them. Cannon FE is a versatile build, Not only does it have potential early game damage, the follow up can be different. Whether Voidray play, or Gateway+1 timings into late game Immortal styles. The Zerg has to have better multitasking and scouting to be able to deal with it. These are the kind of strong options Terran are lacking against Zerg. And why Zerg aren't showing as strong a climb in this MU.
I really don't question these Zergs ability as players. I believe they would be able to compete at high levels regardless. But TvZ is suffering heavily right now. And if they hadn't had the large rise in win percentage vs Terran. Then it is more than likely they would have been knocked out of tournaments sooner by Terrans who can't utilise the fact they are currently better. (Koreans especially). So they are getting more credit than deserved. Though they still deserve a lot of credit.
There is a reason players like MVP would never lose to foreigners in the past, there is a reason that players like MVP are losing only to foreign Zergs. There is a reason that all new talent on the scene is Zerg. There is a reason that more people are playing Zerg than ever. It is as clear as day, and is already having a huge negative impact on the scene. We may only hope that HotS rectifies this severely flawed balance.
Also, I play Zerg n_n.
The problem with the whole "TvZ is terribly imbalanced" is that at the highest level - in Korea - there is no reason from results that we've seen (save a short period immediately following the patch) to believe that the match-up is imbalanced.
MVP lost to monchi and naama at homestory-cup, to ret and idra pre-patch and to naniwa at mlg. You're making things up to support your conclusion.
On August 20 2012 22:13 Beatmania wrote: I love how the community is so deluded by protecting their own ego. There are many major factors here that point to there being severe game imbalances. Whilst I don't care for this new phrase, it really can't be argued that success for these Zerg has been elevated to some level. This does not mean they aren't great players. But in ZvT at least they are having a much easier ride.
Though it's difficult to define skill exactly in a game like this, in the most generic sense it is the ability to macro, micro, and multi task better than your opponent whilst executing strategy and making smart decisions. With the patch it is far too difficult for Terran to stunt the Zergs growth with multitasking alone so one of the core skills becomes negated heavily. Some might argue this is the most important skill that defines a players ability. Right now every Terran is playing greedy hoping the Zerg won't choose to just all in them. Zerg DO NOT have this problem to worry about, and that is a problem for the game, especially as a spectator sport. Only the ignorant would contradict this point given all of the games we currently see, results, and feedback from pro Terrans.
This leads to ZvP and some of the statistics shown. A lot of the Zergs ZvP hasn't shown incredible rises like ZvT has done. And this makes perfect sense. The goal for Zerg is the same, be as greedy as possible whilst defending what Protoss throw at them. Cannon FE is a versatile build, Not only does it have potential early game damage, the follow up can be different. Whether Voidray play, or Gateway+1 timings into late game Immortal styles. The Zerg has to have better multitasking and scouting to be able to deal with it. These are the kind of strong options Terran are lacking against Zerg. And why Zerg aren't showing as strong a climb in this MU.
I really don't question these Zergs ability as players. I believe they would be able to compete at high levels regardless. But TvZ is suffering heavily right now. And if they hadn't had the large rise in win percentage vs Terran. Then it is more than likely they would have been knocked out of tournaments sooner by Terrans who can't utilise the fact they are currently better. (Koreans especially). So they are getting more credit than deserved. Though they still deserve a lot of credit.
There is a reason players like MVP would never lose to foreigners in the past, there is a reason that players like MVP are losing only to foreign Zergs. There is a reason that all new talent on the scene is Zerg. There is a reason that more people are playing Zerg than ever. It is as clear as day, and is already having a huge negative impact on the scene. We may only hope that HotS rectifies this severely flawed balance.
Also, I play Zerg n_n.
What foreign zergs is MVP losing to? Last time I checked Violet is a Korean Zerg
Why did the TvZ match up win rates change so much? Doesn't take a rocket scientist, it was the patch, where every Terran suddenly lost their grasp on the TvZ matchup because the timings don't work anymore and there was a period where they were losing terribly because they had to reinvent the timings and come up with new builds
What this queen buff did allow is Zerg to defend easier which is what Blizzard intended but the side effect of that being we can now reach the promised land of Brood Lord Infestor easier because we don't have to guess what all in we're defending against. So Blizzard is making a change to help Terran deal with late game Zerg, obviously 1 changes the early game and 1 changes the late game so any win rate changes won't be obvious but after seeing MVP use it successfully without the change I can only think that it's going to help the problem, the thought now should be is it going to be too good and completely destroy Zerg's late game forcing them into winning earlier.
On August 20 2012 21:24 nimbim wrote: This thread is just an excuse for every player who prefers to blame losses on external circumstances (i.e. "blizz screwed up balance") to vent their super biased opinion.
The discussion in OP completely disregards the fact that T and P had to adjust their strategies to the new balance, so naturally they lost a ton of extra games at first. Also, as pointed out a couple of times, the sample size is way too small.
Watch MVP vs Nerchio and maybe next we will see threads about "[D?]seeker missile op" and if there was a next patch, people would find something else that makes their race underpowered. If MVP and Taeja can stomp Zergs, other Terrans will (eventually) catch up.
The entire reason people are annoyed is because this isn't a consequence of Zergs discovering new things, Blizzard are holding their hands and giving them the tools to defend what the other two races have been doing.
The knock-on effects are pretty big too, in terms of interesting pressures and harassment. I play Protoss, and I used to like to do zealot/zealot/stalker pressures off one gate against Zerg, but it just doesn't really work anymore because Queens hold off those kind of small forces pretty easily.
So instead of doing non-committal pressure harassment to force units, I found that I had to rely on 2 base timings much more given how good a catch-all defence Queens can be. Just makes for a more boring and less varied game
What the fuck man? Protoss has gotten more buffs in the past year than zerg. Blizzard patches those things, because they don't work out the way they think they should. But yeah, please go and figure out how to play 5range immortal allin and do 40HP warp prism harass.
Dual forges builds existed before the upgrade buff, I don't really get why the buff was put in there.
From my past posts I actually disagreed with the idea to buff the immortal to hold 1/1/1s, it was tough to hold back in the day but that was as much a result of the map pool at that time than it was a consequence of the build itself.
The warp prism buff was to encourage a less deathball-centric style, and to an extent it did this. However for me it's only really HerO's PvZ that consistently does this, as timing attacks and deathballs are still just as viable. Bit of a shame as I love to watch HerO's multitasking at work
what's your point? Those patches happened regardless, whether you think they were needed or not. I could say the same thing about the queen range. It was not needed, but it happened. If they don't want to remove it, then they should try to fix other parts of the one MU that got really affected too much by it. Hey wait, that's what they are doing!
Protoss received buffs to augment existing builds, or deal with a specific early/midgame push. However you don't see Protoss players claiming that their good play is a reason that the 1/1/1 push died, they'll accept that the patch to immortal range was the largest contributory factor.
We whined like fuck about the 1/1/1, so I think it'd be hypocritical of us to castigate Zergs or Terrans for asking for changes, however most of the good Protoss posters around at least acknowledge the effect patches had.
Zergs seem to on the whole claim it's righting some karmic imbalance that their race is ridiculous at the minute in ZvT
On August 20 2012 21:57 Adonminus wrote: I know that Vortix, SortOf and Nerchio were all good players. I usually check the grandmaster league from time to time and there were many times I saw either Nerchion or Vortix in rank 1. SortOf is also quite good, I believe he was gm since it first came out.
However, it amazes me that most of the successful foreign players are zerg. It really bothers me, why protoss players aren't that good? Imbalance or simply not talented enough? I would really want to know.
Mana winning DH, Naniwa doing great in GSL, Thorzain winning the other DH? Only zergs posting good results?
Dont be so "narrow-sighted", any maybe you would spot other decent players .
On August 20 2012 21:24 nimbim wrote: This thread is just an excuse for every player who prefers to blame losses on external circumstances (i.e. "blizz screwed up balance") to vent their super biased opinion.
The discussion in OP completely disregards the fact that T and P had to adjust their strategies to the new balance, so naturally they lost a ton of extra games at first. Also, as pointed out a couple of times, the sample size is way too small.
Watch MVP vs Nerchio and maybe next we will see threads about "[D?]seeker missile op" and if there was a next patch, people would find something else that makes their race underpowered. If MVP and Taeja can stomp Zergs, other Terrans will (eventually) catch up.
The entire reason people are annoyed is because this isn't a consequence of Zergs discovering new things, Blizzard are holding their hands and giving them the tools to defend what the other two races have been doing.
The knock-on effects are pretty big too, in terms of interesting pressures and harassment. I play Protoss, and I used to like to do zealot/zealot/stalker pressures off one gate against Zerg, but it just doesn't really work anymore because Queens hold off those kind of small forces pretty easily.
So instead of doing non-committal pressure harassment to force units, I found that I had to rely on 2 base timings much more given how good a catch-all defence Queens can be. Just makes for a more boring and less varied game
What the fuck man? Protoss has gotten more buffs in the past year than zerg. Blizzard patches those things, because they don't work out the way they think they should. But yeah, please go and figure out how to play 5range immortal allin and do 40HP warp prism harass.
Dual forges builds existed before the upgrade buff, I don't really get why the buff was put in there.
From my past posts I actually disagreed with the idea to buff the immortal to hold 1/1/1s, it was tough to hold back in the day but that was as much a result of the map pool at that time than it was a consequence of the build itself.
The warp prism buff was to encourage a less deathball-centric style, and to an extent it did this. However for me it's only really HerO's PvZ that consistently does this, as timing attacks and deathballs are still just as viable. Bit of a shame as I love to watch HerO's multitasking at work
what's your point? Those patches happened regardless, whether you think they were needed or not. I could say the same thing about the queen range. It was not needed, but it happened. If they don't want to remove it, then they should try to fix other parts of the one MU that got really affected too much by it. Hey wait, that's what they are doing!
Protoss received buffs to augment existing builds, or deal with a specific early/midgame push. However you don't see Protoss players claiming that their good play is a reason that the 1/1/1 push died, they'll accept that the patch to immortal range was the largest contributory factor.
We whined like fuck about the 1/1/1, so I think it'd be hypocritical of us to castigate Zergs or Terrans for asking for changes, however most of the good Protoss posters around at least acknowledge the effect patches had.
Zergs seem to on the whole claim it's righting some karmic imbalance that their race is ridiculous at the minute in ZvT
I havent seen Vortix or SortOf or Nerchio use any big queen builds either at IEM
On August 20 2012 22:13 Beatmania wrote: I love how the community is so deluded by protecting their own ego. There are many major factors here that point to there being severe game imbalances. Whilst I don't care for this new phrase, it really can't be argued that success for these Zerg has been elevated to some level. This does not mean they aren't great players. But in ZvT at least they are having a much easier ride.
Though it's difficult to define skill exactly in a game like this, in the most generic sense it is the ability to macro, micro, and multi task better than your opponent whilst executing strategy and making smart decisions. With the patch it is far too difficult for Terran to stunt the Zergs growth with multitasking alone so one of the core skills becomes negated heavily. Some might argue this is the most important skill that defines a players ability. Right now every Terran is playing greedy hoping the Zerg won't choose to just all in them. Zerg DO NOT have this problem to worry about, and that is a problem for the game, especially as a spectator sport. Only the ignorant would contradict this point given all of the games we currently see, results, and feedback from pro Terrans.
This leads to ZvP and some of the statistics shown. A lot of the Zergs ZvP hasn't shown incredible rises like ZvT has done. And this makes perfect sense. The goal for Zerg is the same, be as greedy as possible whilst defending what Protoss throw at them. Cannon FE is a versatile build, Not only does it have potential early game damage, the follow up can be different. Whether Voidray play, or Gateway+1 timings into late game Immortal styles. The Zerg has to have better multitasking and scouting to be able to deal with it. These are the kind of strong options Terran are lacking against Zerg. And why Zerg aren't showing as strong a climb in this MU.
I really don't question these Zergs ability as players. I believe they would be able to compete at high levels regardless. But TvZ is suffering heavily right now. And if they hadn't had the large rise in win percentage vs Terran. Then it is more than likely they would have been knocked out of tournaments sooner by Terrans who can't utilise the fact they are currently better. (Koreans especially). So they are getting more credit than deserved. Though they still deserve a lot of credit.
There is a reason players like MVP would never lose to foreigners in the past, there is a reason that players like MVP are losing only to foreign Zergs. There is a reason that all new talent on the scene is Zerg. There is a reason that more people are playing Zerg than ever. It is as clear as day, and is already having a huge negative impact on the scene. We may only hope that HotS rectifies this severely flawed balance.
Also, I play Zerg n_n.
The problem with the whole "TvZ is terribly imbalanced" is that at the highest level - in Korea - there is no reason from results that we've seen (save a short period immediately following the patch) to believe that the match-up is imbalanced.
MVP lost to monchi and naama at homestory-cup, to ret and idra pre-patch and to naniwa at mlg. You're making things up to support your conclusion.
That's why I said players like and not one player specifically. I use MVP as an example of a high level Korean Terran. Your few references to games do not make any strong cases against my points either. As my point is a general theme everyone here reading knows exists. Terran are just having a harder time in the matchup, it can't really be argued, players are able to overcome it obviously. But they shouldn't have to to this extent. Do you think that out of all the foreign players appearing from the tier below suddenly excelling, there shouldn't be one Terran making waves? Do you not think that's a bit of a problem for the scene?
On August 20 2012 22:15 xrapture wrote: I didn't really give any thought to the whole "patchzerg" craze, but Supernova vs Vortix on Antiga was one of the most disgusting things I've ever seen.
How so? SN and Vortix made the same major mistake - to attack into siege units that they were not prepared for.
Vortix was ahead until his Ultras-attack into SNs sieged position and lost much of his army without killing an equal amount. He was ahead because SN cancelled his stim-upgrade and his marine-medivac pressure did nothing.
Then SN was ahead until he attacked into BLs (to take down a hatch that he didn't manage to take down) with minimal anti-air and lost much of his army without killing an equal amount.
From that point on Vortix could take out SNs fourth and deny new expansions, while taking his own expansions.
Vortix made mistakes, but so did SN. Among them never establishing a fifth base when he was far ahead and being slow to deny Vortixs retake of his fourth.
On August 20 2012 22:13 Beatmania wrote: I love how the community is so deluded by protecting their own ego. There are many major factors here that point to there being severe game imbalances. Whilst I don't care for this new phrase, it really can't be argued that success for these Zerg has been elevated to some level. This does not mean they aren't great players. But in ZvT at least they are having a much easier ride.
Though it's difficult to define skill exactly in a game like this, in the most generic sense it is the ability to macro, micro, and multi task better than your opponent whilst executing strategy and making smart decisions. With the patch it is far too difficult for Terran to stunt the Zergs growth with multitasking alone so one of the core skills becomes negated heavily. Some might argue this is the most important skill that defines a players ability. Right now every Terran is playing greedy hoping the Zerg won't choose to just all in them. Zerg DO NOT have this problem to worry about, and that is a problem for the game, especially as a spectator sport. Only the ignorant would contradict this point given all of the games we currently see, results, and feedback from pro Terrans.
This leads to ZvP and some of the statistics shown. A lot of the Zergs ZvP hasn't shown incredible rises like ZvT has done. And this makes perfect sense. The goal for Zerg is the same, be as greedy as possible whilst defending what Protoss throw at them. Cannon FE is a versatile build, Not only does it have potential early game damage, the follow up can be different. Whether Voidray play, or Gateway+1 timings into late game Immortal styles. The Zerg has to have better multitasking and scouting to be able to deal with it. These are the kind of strong options Terran are lacking against Zerg. And why Zerg aren't showing as strong a climb in this MU.
I really don't question these Zergs ability as players. I believe they would be able to compete at high levels regardless. But TvZ is suffering heavily right now. And if they hadn't had the large rise in win percentage vs Terran. Then it is more than likely they would have been knocked out of tournaments sooner by Terrans who can't utilise the fact they are currently better. (Koreans especially). So they are getting more credit than deserved. Though they still deserve a lot of credit.
There is a reason players like MVP would never lose to foreigners in the past, there is a reason that players like MVP are losing only to foreign Zergs. There is a reason that all new talent on the scene is Zerg. There is a reason that more people are playing Zerg than ever. It is as clear as day, and is already having a huge negative impact on the scene. We may only hope that HotS rectifies this severely flawed balance.
Also, I play Zerg n_n.
What foreign zergs is MVP losing to? Last time I checked Violet is a Korean Zerg
Why did the TvZ match up win rates change so much? Doesn't take a rocket scientist, it was the patch, where every Terran suddenly lost their grasp on the TvZ matchup because the timings don't work anymore and there was a period where they were losing terribly because they had to reinvent the timings and come up with new builds
What this queen buff did allow is Zerg to defend easier which is what Blizzard intended but the side effect of that being we can now reach the promised land of Brood Lord Infestor easier because we don't have to guess what all in we're defending against. So Blizzard is making a change to help Terran deal with late game Zerg, obviously 1 changes the early game and 1 changes the late game so any win rate changes won't be obvious but after seeing MVP use it successfully without the change I can only think that it's going to help the problem, the thought now should be is it going to be too good and completely destroy Zerg's late game forcing them into winning earlier.
So how does the fact Zerg have the option to all in Terran for being greedy to deal with the new style, whilst Terran don't so much, support your claim?
On August 20 2012 22:13 Beatmania wrote: I love how the community is so deluded by protecting their own ego. There are many major factors here that point to there being severe game imbalances. Whilst I don't care for this new phrase, it really can't be argued that success for these Zerg has been elevated to some level. This does not mean they aren't great players. But in ZvT at least they are having a much easier ride.
Though it's difficult to define skill exactly in a game like this, in the most generic sense it is the ability to macro, micro, and multi task better than your opponent whilst executing strategy and making smart decisions. With the patch it is far too difficult for Terran to stunt the Zergs growth with multitasking alone so one of the core skills becomes negated heavily. Some might argue this is the most important skill that defines a players ability. Right now every Terran is playing greedy hoping the Zerg won't choose to just all in them. Zerg DO NOT have this problem to worry about, and that is a problem for the game, especially as a spectator sport. Only the ignorant would contradict this point given all of the games we currently see, results, and feedback from pro Terrans.
This leads to ZvP and some of the statistics shown. A lot of the Zergs ZvP hasn't shown incredible rises like ZvT has done. And this makes perfect sense. The goal for Zerg is the same, be as greedy as possible whilst defending what Protoss throw at them. Cannon FE is a versatile build, Not only does it have potential early game damage, the follow up can be different. Whether Voidray play, or Gateway+1 timings into late game Immortal styles. The Zerg has to have better multitasking and scouting to be able to deal with it. These are the kind of strong options Terran are lacking against Zerg. And why Zerg aren't showing as strong a climb in this MU.
I really don't question these Zergs ability as players. I believe they would be able to compete at high levels regardless. But TvZ is suffering heavily right now. And if they hadn't had the large rise in win percentage vs Terran. Then it is more than likely they would have been knocked out of tournaments sooner by Terrans who can't utilise the fact they are currently better. (Koreans especially). So they are getting more credit than deserved. Though they still deserve a lot of credit.
There is a reason players like MVP would never lose to foreigners in the past, there is a reason that players like MVP are losing only to foreign Zergs. There is a reason that all new talent on the scene is Zerg. There is a reason that more people are playing Zerg than ever. It is as clear as day, and is already having a huge negative impact on the scene. We may only hope that HotS rectifies this severely flawed balance.
Also, I play Zerg n_n.
The problem with the whole "TvZ is terribly imbalanced" is that at the highest level - in Korea - there is no reason from results that we've seen (save a short period immediately following the patch) to believe that the match-up is imbalanced.
MVP lost to monchi and naama at homestory-cup, to ret and idra pre-patch and to naniwa at mlg. You're making things up to support your conclusion.
That's why I said players like and not one player specifically. I use MVP as an example of a high level Korean Terran. Your few references to games do not make any strong cases against my points either. As my point is a general theme everyone here reading knows exists. Terran are just having a harder time in the matchup, it can't really be argued, players are able to overcome it obviously. But they shouldn't have to to this extent. Do you think that out of all the foreign players appearing from the tier below suddenly excelling, there shouldn't be one Terran making waves? Do you not think that's a bit of a problem for the scene?
Well, it is telling that the example you used, MVP, directly contradicts your point. As for talents, in Korea, there certainly still are terran players breaking out. How about Sting? I can't speculate on why foreign terrans lack behind their Korean breathren, but it has been this way throughout the history of SC2. And even so, both Thorzain and Kas has won major tournaments in the last months.
The whole concept of a patchzerg is that their zvt winrate would be higher, which the op kind of proves. For the op to completely ignore his zvt findings and focus on ZvZ instead is kind of silly. There's a reason that every single up and coming foreigner (sortof, vortix, suppy, livezerg, jonnyrecco) is Zerg. Do you people really think that's just a coincidence. Also you can't just point to Korean Terrans and say the MU is balanced. The overwhelming evidence outside of Korea is not random chance.
On August 20 2012 22:38 Doodsmack wrote: The whole concept of a patchzerg is that their zvt winrate would be higher, which the op kind of proves. For the op to completely ignore his zvt findings and focus on ZvZ instead is kind of silly. There's a reason that every single up and coming foreigner (sortof, vortix, suppy, livezerg, jonnyrecco) is Zerg. Do you people really think that's just a coincidence. Also you can't just point to Korean Terrans and say the MU is balanced. The overwhelming evidence outside of Korea is not random chance.
funny because vortix and slivko both went down in the opposite MU (ZvT <> ZvP) kinda the same percentage which they went up in the other. Last time I checked my SC2gears thats kinda the normal process if you improve in one MU.
On August 20 2012 22:13 Beatmania wrote: I love how the community is so deluded by protecting their own ego. There are many major factors here that point to there being severe game imbalances. Whilst I don't care for this new phrase, it really can't be argued that success for these Zerg has been elevated to some level. This does not mean they aren't great players. But in ZvT at least they are having a much easier ride.
Though it's difficult to define skill exactly in a game like this, in the most generic sense it is the ability to macro, micro, and multi task better than your opponent whilst executing strategy and making smart decisions. With the patch it is far too difficult for Terran to stunt the Zergs growth with multitasking alone so one of the core skills becomes negated heavily. Some might argue this is the most important skill that defines a players ability. Right now every Terran is playing greedy hoping the Zerg won't choose to just all in them. Zerg DO NOT have this problem to worry about, and that is a problem for the game, especially as a spectator sport. Only the ignorant would contradict this point given all of the games we currently see, results, and feedback from pro Terrans.
This leads to ZvP and some of the statistics shown. A lot of the Zergs ZvP hasn't shown incredible rises like ZvT has done. And this makes perfect sense. The goal for Zerg is the same, be as greedy as possible whilst defending what Protoss throw at them. Cannon FE is a versatile build, Not only does it have potential early game damage, the follow up can be different. Whether Voidray play, or Gateway+1 timings into late game Immortal styles. The Zerg has to have better multitasking and scouting to be able to deal with it. These are the kind of strong options Terran are lacking against Zerg. And why Zerg aren't showing as strong a climb in this MU.
I really don't question these Zergs ability as players. I believe they would be able to compete at high levels regardless. But TvZ is suffering heavily right now. And if they hadn't had the large rise in win percentage vs Terran. Then it is more than likely they would have been knocked out of tournaments sooner by Terrans who can't utilise the fact they are currently better. (Koreans especially). So they are getting more credit than deserved. Though they still deserve a lot of credit.
There is a reason players like MVP would never lose to foreigners in the past, there is a reason that players like MVP are losing only to foreign Zergs. There is a reason that all new talent on the scene is Zerg. There is a reason that more people are playing Zerg than ever. It is as clear as day, and is already having a huge negative impact on the scene. We may only hope that HotS rectifies this severely flawed balance.
Also, I play Zerg n_n.
What foreign zergs is MVP losing to? Last time I checked Violet is a Korean Zerg
Why did the TvZ match up win rates change so much? Doesn't take a rocket scientist, it was the patch, where every Terran suddenly lost their grasp on the TvZ matchup because the timings don't work anymore and there was a period where they were losing terribly because they had to reinvent the timings and come up with new builds
What this queen buff did allow is Zerg to defend easier which is what Blizzard intended but the side effect of that being we can now reach the promised land of Brood Lord Infestor easier because we don't have to guess what all in we're defending against. So Blizzard is making a change to help Terran deal with late game Zerg, obviously 1 changes the early game and 1 changes the late game so any win rate changes won't be obvious but after seeing MVP use it successfully without the change I can only think that it's going to help the problem, the thought now should be is it going to be too good and completely destroy Zerg's late game forcing them into winning earlier.
So how does the fact Zerg have the option to all in Terran for being greedy to deal with the new style, whilst Terran don't so much, support your claim?
list the all ins pls
roach bane is canceled out with tanks in the 3 CC build watch idra v thorzain in the mouz v eg clan war for vod proof.
On August 20 2012 22:13 Beatmania wrote: I love how the community is so deluded by protecting their own ego. There are many major factors here that point to there being severe game imbalances. Whilst I don't care for this new phrase, it really can't be argued that success for these Zerg has been elevated to some level. This does not mean they aren't great players. But in ZvT at least they are having a much easier ride.
Though it's difficult to define skill exactly in a game like this, in the most generic sense it is the ability to macro, micro, and multi task better than your opponent whilst executing strategy and making smart decisions. With the patch it is far too difficult for Terran to stunt the Zergs growth with multitasking alone so one of the core skills becomes negated heavily. Some might argue this is the most important skill that defines a players ability. Right now every Terran is playing greedy hoping the Zerg won't choose to just all in them. Zerg DO NOT have this problem to worry about, and that is a problem for the game, especially as a spectator sport. Only the ignorant would contradict this point given all of the games we currently see, results, and feedback from pro Terrans.
This leads to ZvP and some of the statistics shown. A lot of the Zergs ZvP hasn't shown incredible rises like ZvT has done. And this makes perfect sense. The goal for Zerg is the same, be as greedy as possible whilst defending what Protoss throw at them. Cannon FE is a versatile build, Not only does it have potential early game damage, the follow up can be different. Whether Voidray play, or Gateway+1 timings into late game Immortal styles. The Zerg has to have better multitasking and scouting to be able to deal with it. These are the kind of strong options Terran are lacking against Zerg. And why Zerg aren't showing as strong a climb in this MU.
I really don't question these Zergs ability as players. I believe they would be able to compete at high levels regardless. But TvZ is suffering heavily right now. And if they hadn't had the large rise in win percentage vs Terran. Then it is more than likely they would have been knocked out of tournaments sooner by Terrans who can't utilise the fact they are currently better. (Koreans especially). So they are getting more credit than deserved. Though they still deserve a lot of credit.
There is a reason players like MVP would never lose to foreigners in the past, there is a reason that players like MVP are losing only to foreign Zergs. There is a reason that all new talent on the scene is Zerg. There is a reason that more people are playing Zerg than ever. It is as clear as day, and is already having a huge negative impact on the scene. We may only hope that HotS rectifies this severely flawed balance.
Also, I play Zerg n_n.
The problem with the whole "TvZ is terribly imbalanced" is that at the highest level - in Korea - there is no reason from results that we've seen (save a short period immediately following the patch) to believe that the match-up is imbalanced.
MVP lost to monchi and naama at homestory-cup, to ret and idra pre-patch and to naniwa at mlg. You're making things up to support your conclusion.
That's why I said players like and not one player specifically. I use MVP as an example of a high level Korean Terran. Your few references to games do not make any strong cases against my points either. As my point is a general theme everyone here reading knows exists. Terran are just having a harder time in the matchup, it can't really be argued, players are able to overcome it obviously. But they shouldn't have to to this extent. Do you think that out of all the foreign players appearing from the tier below suddenly excelling, there shouldn't be one Terran making waves? Do you not think that's a bit of a problem for the scene?
Well, it is telling that the example you used, MVP, directly contradicts your point. As for talents, in Korea, there certainly still are terran players breaking out. How about Sting? I can't speculate on why foreign terrans lack behind their Korean breathren, but it has been this way throughout the history of SC2. And even so, both Thorzain and Kas has won major tournaments in the last months.
MVP I guess was a bad example to make that generalisation, but most should be smart enough to see the point and the fact it is a generalisation. And that is Korea where people have much stronger discipline to get to the point of the game where skill can overcome anything. I think the point that I'm making that people will overlook due to their ego or whatever suffering. Is that I'm just saying it's harder for Terrans pretty much all over in this matchup. And the data collected in this thread does represent that. Thorzain and Kas have been in the scene a long time, already established as high level players. Foreign Terrans lack behind, because it requires more time, and a better attitude to achieve anything with the race. Because it is harder right now. Imbalances or not.
I think the difference of Zerg today from Zerg in the past is the way how balance is achieved. What happened over the series of patches is the nerfs of all-ins and risk-based (high variance) play, which most of us would agree is a good thing. It is silly that you just lose when you guessed the opponent's build slightly wrong. Bad thing is that SC2 balance is built upon these risky and fickle things. Zerg benefits from this development, being the reactive, mobile and tech-switchy race.
Characteristics of Korean players are their ultra-sharp builds and great execution, together with their quick and smart decision-making in the little things. European Zergs often have their unique and one-catch-all build which puts them ahead in most of their games. This comes in even more handy in when you cannot prepare against your opponent. Having to train only one style (one build or many closely resembling builds) is an advantage one should not underestimate.
One should not use the term "patch zerg" to blame otherwise talentless or bad players, they are not. They rise above other Zergs because they are strong mechanically in their style and have a robust winning mentally. I think they just lack something the player of the other races have to go through to be a "complete player". This being said, I would not consider Nerchio being even close in the "patch zerg" category.
On August 20 2012 22:13 Beatmania wrote: I love how the community is so deluded by protecting their own ego. There are many major factors here that point to there being severe game imbalances. Whilst I don't care for this new phrase, it really can't be argued that success for these Zerg has been elevated to some level. This does not mean they aren't great players. But in ZvT at least they are having a much easier ride.
Though it's difficult to define skill exactly in a game like this, in the most generic sense it is the ability to macro, micro, and multi task better than your opponent whilst executing strategy and making smart decisions. With the patch it is far too difficult for Terran to stunt the Zergs growth with multitasking alone so one of the core skills becomes negated heavily. Some might argue this is the most important skill that defines a players ability. Right now every Terran is playing greedy hoping the Zerg won't choose to just all in them. Zerg DO NOT have this problem to worry about, and that is a problem for the game, especially as a spectator sport. Only the ignorant would contradict this point given all of the games we currently see, results, and feedback from pro Terrans.
This leads to ZvP and some of the statistics shown. A lot of the Zergs ZvP hasn't shown incredible rises like ZvT has done. And this makes perfect sense. The goal for Zerg is the same, be as greedy as possible whilst defending what Protoss throw at them. Cannon FE is a versatile build, Not only does it have potential early game damage, the follow up can be different. Whether Voidray play, or Gateway+1 timings into late game Immortal styles. The Zerg has to have better multitasking and scouting to be able to deal with it. These are the kind of strong options Terran are lacking against Zerg. And why Zerg aren't showing as strong a climb in this MU.
I really don't question these Zergs ability as players. I believe they would be able to compete at high levels regardless. But TvZ is suffering heavily right now. And if they hadn't had the large rise in win percentage vs Terran. Then it is more than likely they would have been knocked out of tournaments sooner by Terrans who can't utilise the fact they are currently better. (Koreans especially). So they are getting more credit than deserved. Though they still deserve a lot of credit.
There is a reason players like MVP would never lose to foreigners in the past, there is a reason that players like MVP are losing only to foreign Zergs. There is a reason that all new talent on the scene is Zerg. There is a reason that more people are playing Zerg than ever. It is as clear as day, and is already having a huge negative impact on the scene. We may only hope that HotS rectifies this severely flawed balance.
Also, I play Zerg n_n.
What foreign zergs is MVP losing to? Last time I checked Violet is a Korean Zerg
Why did the TvZ match up win rates change so much? Doesn't take a rocket scientist, it was the patch, where every Terran suddenly lost their grasp on the TvZ matchup because the timings don't work anymore and there was a period where they were losing terribly because they had to reinvent the timings and come up with new builds
What this queen buff did allow is Zerg to defend easier which is what Blizzard intended but the side effect of that being we can now reach the promised land of Brood Lord Infestor easier because we don't have to guess what all in we're defending against. So Blizzard is making a change to help Terran deal with late game Zerg, obviously 1 changes the early game and 1 changes the late game so any win rate changes won't be obvious but after seeing MVP use it successfully without the change I can only think that it's going to help the problem, the thought now should be is it going to be too good and completely destroy Zerg's late game forcing them into winning earlier.
So how does the fact Zerg have the option to all in Terran for being greedy to deal with the new style, whilst Terran don't so much, support your claim?
list the all ins pls
roach bane is canceled out with tanks in the 3 CC build watch idra v thorzain in the mouz v eg clan war for vod proof.
i expect likewise evidence on your claims
One example with a Zerg who is performing poorly lately and a really good Terran? That seems relevant to the discussion, if you like I will find sets of examples of pro Terrans losing to ling baneling all ins, and roachling all ins later. And you can find me pro Terrans all inning Zerg and winning games, k? n_n
On August 20 2012 22:13 Beatmania wrote: I love how the community is so deluded by protecting their own ego. There are many major factors here that point to there being severe game imbalances. Whilst I don't care for this new phrase, it really can't be argued that success for these Zerg has been elevated to some level. This does not mean they aren't great players. But in ZvT at least they are having a much easier ride.
Though it's difficult to define skill exactly in a game like this, in the most generic sense it is the ability to macro, micro, and multi task better than your opponent whilst executing strategy and making smart decisions. With the patch it is far too difficult for Terran to stunt the Zergs growth with multitasking alone so one of the core skills becomes negated heavily. Some might argue this is the most important skill that defines a players ability. Right now every Terran is playing greedy hoping the Zerg won't choose to just all in them. Zerg DO NOT have this problem to worry about, and that is a problem for the game, especially as a spectator sport. Only the ignorant would contradict this point given all of the games we currently see, results, and feedback from pro Terrans.
This leads to ZvP and some of the statistics shown. A lot of the Zergs ZvP hasn't shown incredible rises like ZvT has done. And this makes perfect sense. The goal for Zerg is the same, be as greedy as possible whilst defending what Protoss throw at them. Cannon FE is a versatile build, Not only does it have potential early game damage, the follow up can be different. Whether Voidray play, or Gateway+1 timings into late game Immortal styles. The Zerg has to have better multitasking and scouting to be able to deal with it. These are the kind of strong options Terran are lacking against Zerg. And why Zerg aren't showing as strong a climb in this MU.
I really don't question these Zergs ability as players. I believe they would be able to compete at high levels regardless. But TvZ is suffering heavily right now. And if they hadn't had the large rise in win percentage vs Terran. Then it is more than likely they would have been knocked out of tournaments sooner by Terrans who can't utilise the fact they are currently better. (Koreans especially). So they are getting more credit than deserved. Though they still deserve a lot of credit.
There is a reason players like MVP would never lose to foreigners in the past, there is a reason that players like MVP are losing only to foreign Zergs. There is a reason that all new talent on the scene is Zerg. There is a reason that more people are playing Zerg than ever. It is as clear as day, and is already having a huge negative impact on the scene. We may only hope that HotS rectifies this severely flawed balance.
Also, I play Zerg n_n.
What foreign zergs is MVP losing to? Last time I checked Violet is a Korean Zerg
Why did the TvZ match up win rates change so much? Doesn't take a rocket scientist, it was the patch, where every Terran suddenly lost their grasp on the TvZ matchup because the timings don't work anymore and there was a period where they were losing terribly because they had to reinvent the timings and come up with new builds
What this queen buff did allow is Zerg to defend easier which is what Blizzard intended but the side effect of that being we can now reach the promised land of Brood Lord Infestor easier because we don't have to guess what all in we're defending against. So Blizzard is making a change to help Terran deal with late game Zerg, obviously 1 changes the early game and 1 changes the late game so any win rate changes won't be obvious but after seeing MVP use it successfully without the change I can only think that it's going to help the problem, the thought now should be is it going to be too good and completely destroy Zerg's late game forcing them into winning earlier.
So how does the fact Zerg have the option to all in Terran for being greedy to deal with the new style, whilst Terran don't so much, support your claim?
list the all ins pls
roach bane is canceled out with tanks in the 3 CC build watch idra v thorzain in the mouz v eg clan war for vod proof.
i expect likewise evidence on your claims
One example with a Zerg who is performing poorly lately and a really good Terran? That seems relevant to the discussion, if you like I will find sets of examples of pro Terrans losing to ling baneling all ins, and roachling all ins later. And you can find me pro Terrans all inning Zerg and winning games, k? n_n
2 years worth of terran play to find those examples scattered all over
besides I can't even tell what you're implying anymore are you trying to imply that Terran can no longer all in because Queens have 2 extra range?
The reason people are upset about "patchzergs" is because mechanics in this game just seem to mean very little when its so easy for for a zerg now to just take 3 bases so quickly and tech to t3 deathball while being completely safe due to infestors, and at the same time not have to really do anything but macro up. This style was prevalent before the patch, but the patch made it that much easier to do. DRG and Nestea and Leenock and July at their top points were so impressive because they had incredible mechanics. The new players we see impress by their ability to block aggression and get a deathball. ( Oh yeah and "infestor control"). It just doesn't feel as good to see them win vs a player who has insanely good mechanical skill, and thus people get upset. I miss the days when July was crushing face with insanely good harass and mutaling bane attacks off 3/4 base. Was so fun to watch and I really feel like mutas not really being seen in the MU as much, and all the infestor heavy play has dumbed down zerg play.
You also have to account for changes in metagame as well. There's only 1 real early game strategy against non-mirror matchups for Zerg. A year ago, going hatch pool against terran seemed like the greediest play in the book from a Zerg and was deemed punishable by any early game aggression due to the late pool and therefore late zergling speed. Going pool and then double hatch against Protoss seemed like a weak response to the popular forge fast expand openings that started to become more and more popular as an opening against Zerg but it is now the standard play and it's a pretty safe assumption that if you haven't been busted down by a roach ling timing attack, that your opponent has made only drones.
I've been playing Zerg since the game's release. While I'm at no point an expert in strategy nor an expert in execution I've seen the matchups change. Every single race will have its day in the sun. Remember when everyone was crying "Terran IMBA" because they won every tournament for the first 5 months? If what is happening is truly not intended and "broken" then some action will be taken. Perhaps there are ways of using units or building that people have never thought of.
I honestly just think people use the range 5 queen as an excuse for them losing. I've played so many game where people would type "zerg op" in chat when their loss had nothing to do with the fact that I built 2 extra queens. 2 years ago everyone considered zerg by far the most underpowered race and now with just a few tweaks to infestors, overlord speed, and queens we're crazy overpowered.
On August 20 2012 22:13 Beatmania wrote: I love how the community is so deluded by protecting their own ego. There are many major factors here that point to there being severe game imbalances. Whilst I don't care for this new phrase, it really can't be argued that success for these Zerg has been elevated to some level. This does not mean they aren't great players. But in ZvT at least they are having a much easier ride.
Though it's difficult to define skill exactly in a game like this, in the most generic sense it is the ability to macro, micro, and multi task better than your opponent whilst executing strategy and making smart decisions. With the patch it is far too difficult for Terran to stunt the Zergs growth with multitasking alone so one of the core skills becomes negated heavily. Some might argue this is the most important skill that defines a players ability. Right now every Terran is playing greedy hoping the Zerg won't choose to just all in them. Zerg DO NOT have this problem to worry about, and that is a problem for the game, especially as a spectator sport. Only the ignorant would contradict this point given all of the games we currently see, results, and feedback from pro Terrans.
This leads to ZvP and some of the statistics shown. A lot of the Zergs ZvP hasn't shown incredible rises like ZvT has done. And this makes perfect sense. The goal for Zerg is the same, be as greedy as possible whilst defending what Protoss throw at them. Cannon FE is a versatile build, Not only does it have potential early game damage, the follow up can be different. Whether Voidray play, or Gateway+1 timings into late game Immortal styles. The Zerg has to have better multitasking and scouting to be able to deal with it. These are the kind of strong options Terran are lacking against Zerg. And why Zerg aren't showing as strong a climb in this MU.
I really don't question these Zergs ability as players. I believe they would be able to compete at high levels regardless. But TvZ is suffering heavily right now. And if they hadn't had the large rise in win percentage vs Terran. Then it is more than likely they would have been knocked out of tournaments sooner by Terrans who can't utilise the fact they are currently better. (Koreans especially). So they are getting more credit than deserved. Though they still deserve a lot of credit.
There is a reason players like MVP would never lose to foreigners in the past, there is a reason that players like MVP are losing only to foreign Zergs. There is a reason that all new talent on the scene is Zerg. There is a reason that more people are playing Zerg than ever. It is as clear as day, and is already having a huge negative impact on the scene. We may only hope that HotS rectifies this severely flawed balance.
Also, I play Zerg n_n.
What foreign zergs is MVP losing to? Last time I checked Violet is a Korean Zerg
Why did the TvZ match up win rates change so much? Doesn't take a rocket scientist, it was the patch, where every Terran suddenly lost their grasp on the TvZ matchup because the timings don't work anymore and there was a period where they were losing terribly because they had to reinvent the timings and come up with new builds
What this queen buff did allow is Zerg to defend easier which is what Blizzard intended but the side effect of that being we can now reach the promised land of Brood Lord Infestor easier because we don't have to guess what all in we're defending against. So Blizzard is making a change to help Terran deal with late game Zerg, obviously 1 changes the early game and 1 changes the late game so any win rate changes won't be obvious but after seeing MVP use it successfully without the change I can only think that it's going to help the problem, the thought now should be is it going to be too good and completely destroy Zerg's late game forcing them into winning earlier.
So how does the fact Zerg have the option to all in Terran for being greedy to deal with the new style, whilst Terran don't so much, support your claim?
list the all ins pls
roach bane is canceled out with tanks in the 3 CC build watch idra v thorzain in the mouz v eg clan war for vod proof.
i expect likewise evidence on your claims
One example with a Zerg who is performing poorly lately and a really good Terran? That seems relevant to the discussion, if you like I will find sets of examples of pro Terrans losing to ling baneling all ins, and roachling all ins later. And you can find me pro Terrans all inning Zerg and winning games, k? n_n
2 years worth of terran play to find those examples scattered all over
besides I can't even tell what you're implying anymore are you trying to imply that Terran can no longer all in because Queens have 2 extra range?
Examples since the patch please, do you know what we're discussing here? I'm saying Zerg have the advantage when it comes to the power of an "All in" in the matchup. Which they do. Otherwise Terrans would be doing all ins, and not being greedy defending all ins trying to be ready to fight toe to toe late game. It's a problem for the game as an esport when options to win games start to become limited. That is what people are failing to see because of ego.
On August 20 2012 22:13 Beatmania wrote: I love how the community is so deluded by protecting their own ego. There are many major factors here that point to there being severe game imbalances. Whilst I don't care for this new phrase, it really can't be argued that success for these Zerg has been elevated to some level. This does not mean they aren't great players. But in ZvT at least they are having a much easier ride.
Though it's difficult to define skill exactly in a game like this, in the most generic sense it is the ability to macro, micro, and multi task better than your opponent whilst executing strategy and making smart decisions. With the patch it is far too difficult for Terran to stunt the Zergs growth with multitasking alone so one of the core skills becomes negated heavily. Some might argue this is the most important skill that defines a players ability. Right now every Terran is playing greedy hoping the Zerg won't choose to just all in them. Zerg DO NOT have this problem to worry about, and that is a problem for the game, especially as a spectator sport. Only the ignorant would contradict this point given all of the games we currently see, results, and feedback from pro Terrans.
This leads to ZvP and some of the statistics shown. A lot of the Zergs ZvP hasn't shown incredible rises like ZvT has done. And this makes perfect sense. The goal for Zerg is the same, be as greedy as possible whilst defending what Protoss throw at them. Cannon FE is a versatile build, Not only does it have potential early game damage, the follow up can be different. Whether Voidray play, or Gateway+1 timings into late game Immortal styles. The Zerg has to have better multitasking and scouting to be able to deal with it. These are the kind of strong options Terran are lacking against Zerg. And why Zerg aren't showing as strong a climb in this MU.
I really don't question these Zergs ability as players. I believe they would be able to compete at high levels regardless. But TvZ is suffering heavily right now. And if they hadn't had the large rise in win percentage vs Terran. Then it is more than likely they would have been knocked out of tournaments sooner by Terrans who can't utilise the fact they are currently better. (Koreans especially). So they are getting more credit than deserved. Though they still deserve a lot of credit.
There is a reason players like MVP would never lose to foreigners in the past, there is a reason that players like MVP are losing only to foreign Zergs. There is a reason that all new talent on the scene is Zerg. There is a reason that more people are playing Zerg than ever. It is as clear as day, and is already having a huge negative impact on the scene. We may only hope that HotS rectifies this severely flawed balance.
Also, I play Zerg n_n.
What foreign zergs is MVP losing to? Last time I checked Violet is a Korean Zerg
Why did the TvZ match up win rates change so much? Doesn't take a rocket scientist, it was the patch, where every Terran suddenly lost their grasp on the TvZ matchup because the timings don't work anymore and there was a period where they were losing terribly because they had to reinvent the timings and come up with new builds
What this queen buff did allow is Zerg to defend easier which is what Blizzard intended but the side effect of that being we can now reach the promised land of Brood Lord Infestor easier because we don't have to guess what all in we're defending against. So Blizzard is making a change to help Terran deal with late game Zerg, obviously 1 changes the early game and 1 changes the late game so any win rate changes won't be obvious but after seeing MVP use it successfully without the change I can only think that it's going to help the problem, the thought now should be is it going to be too good and completely destroy Zerg's late game forcing them into winning earlier.
So how does the fact Zerg have the option to all in Terran for being greedy to deal with the new style, whilst Terran don't so much, support your claim?
list the all ins pls
roach bane is canceled out with tanks in the 3 CC build watch idra v thorzain in the mouz v eg clan war for vod proof.
i expect likewise evidence on your claims
One example with a Zerg who is performing poorly lately and a really good Terran? That seems relevant to the discussion, if you like I will find sets of examples of pro Terrans losing to ling baneling all ins, and roachling all ins later. And you can find me pro Terrans all inning Zerg and winning games, k? n_n
2 years worth of terran play to find those examples scattered all over
besides I can't even tell what you're implying anymore are you trying to imply that Terran can no longer all in because Queens have 2 extra range?
Examples since the patch please, do you know what we're discussing here? I'm saying Zerg have the advantage when it comes to the power of an "All in" in the matchup. Which they do. Otherwise Terrans would be doing all ins, and not being greedy defending all ins trying to be ready to fight toe to toe late game. It's a problem for the game as an esport when options to win games start to become limited. That is what people are failing to see because of ego.
All inning into a Siege Tank and sim city sure Zerg has the advantage
Terran can still disguise their all ins if they try to and they can still do effective all ins seems lately 3 CC macro up is the standard
On August 20 2012 22:54 E.L.V.I.S wrote: Come on guys, Slivko has always been a good player, recently he is improving, but in 2010 I knew his name already..
Just because you know him from 2010, that doesn't mean anything. He improved, but that's normal for somebody that remains active and is motivated.
P.S Please stop QQing so much on ladder when you lose, thanks
your post fails to mention who their wins came against in non-mirror matchups, nor does it mention which tournaments those wins and losses came from. For all we know, pre-patch slivko was playing relatively weaker protoss while post-patch ended up playing stronger ones resulting in those losses. This data alone can't be used to determine whether the concept of patchzergs is a correct one.
On August 20 2012 22:53 Irre wrote: The reason people are upset about "patchzergs" is because mechanics in this game just seem to mean very little when its so easy for for a zerg now to just take 3 bases so quickly and tech to t3 deathball while being completely safe due to infestors, and at the same time not have to really do anything but macro up. This style was prevalent before the patch, but the patch made it that much easier to do. DRG and Nestea and Leenock and July at their top points were so impressive because they had incredible mechanics. The new players we see impress by their ability to block aggression and get a deathball. ( Oh yeah and "infestor control"). It just doesn't feel as good to see them win vs a player who has insanely good mechanical skill, and thus people get upset. I miss the days when July was crushing face with insanely good harass and mutaling bane attacks off 3/4 base. Was so fun to watch and I really feel like mutas not really being seen in the MU as much, and all the infestor heavy play has dumbed down zerg play.
Nerchio and Vortix, the players with the most success against terran this past weekend, are both 300+ APM players (~320 and ~310 respectively). Sortof and Slivko are slower (~250 and ~240), but are their results versus terran really that impressive? Nestea plays at ~285 and Leenock at ~275.
Meanwhile, Kas plays at ~240, Thorzain ~190, Lucifron ~240, socke ~225, Grubby ~180 and naniwa ~220.
There are reasons to criticize the development of zerg metagame (it is becoming what people don't like about protoss, amass a deathball and win), but to point to it being easy because of speed is not the right place. Being a succesful zerg in lategame demands a lot of speed, maybe more so than the other races. That may not be true of terran anymore (you need a lot of speed in order to multitask against Z in lategame), but it is definitely true of protoss.
On August 20 2012 22:13 Beatmania wrote: I love how the community is so deluded by protecting their own ego. There are many major factors here that point to there being severe game imbalances. Whilst I don't care for this new phrase, it really can't be argued that success for these Zerg has been elevated to some level. This does not mean they aren't great players. But in ZvT at least they are having a much easier ride.
Though it's difficult to define skill exactly in a game like this, in the most generic sense it is the ability to macro, micro, and multi task better than your opponent whilst executing strategy and making smart decisions. With the patch it is far too difficult for Terran to stunt the Zergs growth with multitasking alone so one of the core skills becomes negated heavily. Some might argue this is the most important skill that defines a players ability. Right now every Terran is playing greedy hoping the Zerg won't choose to just all in them. Zerg DO NOT have this problem to worry about, and that is a problem for the game, especially as a spectator sport. Only the ignorant would contradict this point given all of the games we currently see, results, and feedback from pro Terrans.
This leads to ZvP and some of the statistics shown. A lot of the Zergs ZvP hasn't shown incredible rises like ZvT has done. And this makes perfect sense. The goal for Zerg is the same, be as greedy as possible whilst defending what Protoss throw at them. Cannon FE is a versatile build, Not only does it have potential early game damage, the follow up can be different. Whether Voidray play, or Gateway+1 timings into late game Immortal styles. The Zerg has to have better multitasking and scouting to be able to deal with it. These are the kind of strong options Terran are lacking against Zerg. And why Zerg aren't showing as strong a climb in this MU.
I really don't question these Zergs ability as players. I believe they would be able to compete at high levels regardless. But TvZ is suffering heavily right now. And if they hadn't had the large rise in win percentage vs Terran. Then it is more than likely they would have been knocked out of tournaments sooner by Terrans who can't utilise the fact they are currently better. (Koreans especially). So they are getting more credit than deserved. Though they still deserve a lot of credit.
There is a reason players like MVP would never lose to foreigners in the past, there is a reason that players like MVP are losing only to foreign Zergs. There is a reason that all new talent on the scene is Zerg. There is a reason that more people are playing Zerg than ever. It is as clear as day, and is already having a huge negative impact on the scene. We may only hope that HotS rectifies this severely flawed balance.
Also, I play Zerg n_n.
What foreign zergs is MVP losing to? Last time I checked Violet is a Korean Zerg
Why did the TvZ match up win rates change so much? Doesn't take a rocket scientist, it was the patch, where every Terran suddenly lost their grasp on the TvZ matchup because the timings don't work anymore and there was a period where they were losing terribly because they had to reinvent the timings and come up with new builds
What this queen buff did allow is Zerg to defend easier which is what Blizzard intended but the side effect of that being we can now reach the promised land of Brood Lord Infestor easier because we don't have to guess what all in we're defending against. So Blizzard is making a change to help Terran deal with late game Zerg, obviously 1 changes the early game and 1 changes the late game so any win rate changes won't be obvious but after seeing MVP use it successfully without the change I can only think that it's going to help the problem, the thought now should be is it going to be too good and completely destroy Zerg's late game forcing them into winning earlier.
So how does the fact Zerg have the option to all in Terran for being greedy to deal with the new style, whilst Terran don't so much, support your claim?
list the all ins pls
roach bane is canceled out with tanks in the 3 CC build watch idra v thorzain in the mouz v eg clan war for vod proof.
i expect likewise evidence on your claims
One example with a Zerg who is performing poorly lately and a really good Terran? That seems relevant to the discussion, if you like I will find sets of examples of pro Terrans losing to ling baneling all ins, and roachling all ins later. And you can find me pro Terrans all inning Zerg and winning games, k? n_n
2 years worth of terran play to find those examples scattered all over
besides I can't even tell what you're implying anymore are you trying to imply that Terran can no longer all in because Queens have 2 extra range?
Examples since the patch please, do you know what we're discussing here? I'm saying Zerg have the advantage when it comes to the power of an "All in" in the matchup. Which they do. Otherwise Terrans would be doing all ins, and not being greedy defending all ins trying to be ready to fight toe to toe late game. It's a problem for the game as an esport when options to win games start to become limited. That is what people are failing to see because of ego.
All inning into a Siege Tank and sim city sure Zerg has the advantage
Terran can still disguise their all ins if they try to and they can still do effective all ins seems lately 3 CC macro up is the standard
Yeah, cos standard TvZ isn't hellion banshee for map control, and Zerg all ins don't come when 2 banshees and 6 hellions are out. You're talking about one example that isn't even the standard. Vs so many examples everywhere of hellion banshee being destroyed. Go watch demuslims stream.. If you can anyway, as he has just stopped lately.
Also the problem isn't just the all in aspect, it's the fact that if you choose to all in a player, it should have negative implications for the player. If a Terran all in fails, it is generally always a huge loss against a early third zerg. Zerg are allowed to all in and then be massively ahead, Even if they don't do significant damage. Anyway, I don't feel like your points are worth debating any more.
On August 20 2012 22:53 Irre wrote: The reason people are upset about "patchzergs" is because mechanics in this game just seem to mean very little when its so easy for for a zerg now to just take 3 bases so quickly and tech to t3 deathball while being completely safe due to infestors, and at the same time not have to really do anything but macro up. This style was prevalent before the patch, but the patch made it that much easier to do. DRG and Nestea and Leenock and July at their top points were so impressive because they had incredible mechanics. The new players we see impress by their ability to block aggression and get a deathball. ( Oh yeah and "infestor control"). It just doesn't feel as good to see them win vs a player who has insanely good mechanical skill, and thus people get upset. I miss the days when July was crushing face with insanely good harass and mutaling bane attacks off 3/4 base. Was so fun to watch and I really feel like mutas not really being seen in the MU as much, and all the infestor heavy play has dumbed down zerg play.
Nerchio and Vortix, the players with the most success against terran this past weekend, are both 300+ APM players (~320 and ~310 respectively). Sortof and Slivko are slower (~250 and ~240), but are their results versus terran really that impressive? Nestea plays at ~285 and Leenock at ~275.
Meanwhile, Kas plays at ~240, Thorzain ~190, Lucifron ~240, socke ~225, Grubby ~180 and naniwa ~220.
There are reasons to criticize the development of zerg metagame (it is becoming what people don't like about protoss, amass a deathball and win), but to point to it being easy because of speed is not the right place. Being a succesful zerg in lategame demands a lot of speed, maybe more so than the other races. That may not be true of terran anymore (you need a lot of speed in order to multitask against Z in lategame), but it is definitely true of protoss.
and drg plays at 400+, almost loses to naniwa who got smashed by jrecco and now?
On August 20 2012 22:54 E.L.V.I.S wrote: Come on guys, Slivko has always been a good player, recently he is improving, but in 2010 I knew his name already..
Just because you know him from 2010, that doesn't mean anything. He improved, but that's normal for somebody that remains active and is motivated.
P.S Please stop QQing so much on ladder when you lose, thanks
On August 20 2012 22:53 Irre wrote: The reason people are upset about "patchzergs" is because mechanics in this game just seem to mean very little when its so easy for for a zerg now to just take 3 bases so quickly and tech to t3 deathball while being completely safe due to infestors, and at the same time not have to really do anything but macro up. This style was prevalent before the patch, but the patch made it that much easier to do. DRG and Nestea and Leenock and July at their top points were so impressive because they had incredible mechanics. The new players we see impress by their ability to block aggression and get a deathball. ( Oh yeah and "infestor control"). It just doesn't feel as good to see them win vs a player who has insanely good mechanical skill, and thus people get upset. I miss the days when July was crushing face with insanely good harass and mutaling bane attacks off 3/4 base. Was so fun to watch and I really feel like mutas not really being seen in the MU as much, and all the infestor heavy play has dumbed down zerg play.
Nerchio and Vortix, the players with the most success against terran this past weekend, are both 300+ APM players (~320 and ~310 respectively). Sortof and Slivko are slower (~250 and ~240), but are their results versus terran really that impressive? Nestea plays at ~285 and Leenock at ~275.
Meanwhile, Kas plays at ~240, Thorzain ~190, Lucifron ~240, socke ~225, Grubby ~180 and naniwa ~220.
There are reasons to criticize the development of zerg metagame (it is becoming what people don't like about protoss, amass a deathball and win), but to point to it being easy because of speed is not the right place. Being a succesful zerg in lategame demands a lot of speed, maybe more so than the other races. That may not be true of terran anymore (you need a lot of speed in order to multitask against Z in lategame), but it is definitely true of protoss.
What's the link between APM and skill ? DRG has more than 400 APM. When I play terran, I have something like 180 APM, and when I play zerg, it's more like 220. But i'm master as terran and diamond as zerg. It does mean nothing at all.
On August 20 2012 22:53 Irre wrote: The reason people are upset about "patchzergs" is because mechanics in this game just seem to mean very little when its so easy for for a zerg now to just take 3 bases so quickly and tech to t3 deathball while being completely safe due to infestors, and at the same time not have to really do anything but macro up. This style was prevalent before the patch, but the patch made it that much easier to do. DRG and Nestea and Leenock and July at their top points were so impressive because they had incredible mechanics. The new players we see impress by their ability to block aggression and get a deathball. ( Oh yeah and "infestor control"). It just doesn't feel as good to see them win vs a player who has insanely good mechanical skill, and thus people get upset. I miss the days when July was crushing face with insanely good harass and mutaling bane attacks off 3/4 base. Was so fun to watch and I really feel like mutas not really being seen in the MU as much, and all the infestor heavy play has dumbed down zerg play.
Nerchio and Vortix, the players with the most success against terran this past weekend, are both 300+ APM players (~320 and ~310 respectively). Sortof and Slivko are slower (~250 and ~240), but are their results versus terran really that impressive? Nestea plays at ~285 and Leenock at ~275.
Meanwhile, Kas plays at ~240, Thorzain ~190, Lucifron ~240, socke ~225, Grubby ~180 and naniwa ~220.
There are reasons to criticize the development of zerg metagame (it is becoming what people don't like about protoss, amass a deathball and win), but to point to it being easy because of speed is not the right place. Being a succesful zerg in lategame demands a lot of speed, maybe more so than the other races. That may not be true of terran anymore (you need a lot of speed in order to multitask against Z in lategame), but it is definitely true of protoss.
What does APM have to do with what he wrote? Mechanics and APM aren't the same.
On August 20 2012 22:54 E.L.V.I.S wrote: Come on guys, Slivko has always been a good player, recently he is improving, but in 2010 I knew his name already..
Just because you know him from 2010, that doesn't mean anything. He improved, but that's normal for somebody that remains active and is motivated.
P.S Please stop QQing so much on ladder when you lose, thanks
He's been getting results since IEM Sao Paulo.
Well, I don't think any of these players barring Slivko has enough games against notables to even begin to see anything but random chance. But it is notable that Slivko lost every set to a Korean trained terran before the (latest) patch. Thorzain, Jinro, Polt, Supernova, etc all beat him. And now he lost to Bomber and Mvp. No change, really.
On August 20 2012 20:17 Zarahtra wrote: Personally I've always felt the balance vs skill is kind of like this: [image loading] Edit: This pic isn't really suppose to show how the races are balanced against each other, but rather how a middle of the road terran does compared to a top terran, how a middle of the road zerg does compared to a top zerg and how a middle of the road toss does compared to a top toss. Just didn't wanna show 3 pics
Why that is? Because both protoss and terran need to find creative ways to hurt zerg before t3, else against a player that defends decently enough, they just loose, not really because of skill, but because both races have a really hard time dealing with t3.
Basically a BL army controlled by DRG with infestors underneath are pretty much exactly as good as if the army was controlled by Vortix. Compare that to stalkers/army controlled by MC vs it being controlled by Bling. And finally compare rines controlled by MKP to them being controlled by Sjow. The difference is: the BLs would end up relatively similarly controlled, stalkers would be a lot better controlled and rines are like 3x times better in the hands of MKP.
Basically all the races need to look like terran(pref) or toss, and no race should ever look like zerg.
Are you even aware what units does zerg have, because it seems that you have no clue. How is zerg suppose to micro meele units agains a ranget ones? Have you ever seen a zelot microed agains marines? No, because ITS NOT POSSIBLE.
How are you supposed to micro like a slowest unit in the game (BL)? Do terrans micro their thors? No - because you cannot micro such slow unit...
You compare one of the fastest unit in the game (stimmed marines), and one of the most mobile unit - blink stalkers, to some slow glass cannon type of unit - BL.
Only units that zergs can shine with micro are zerglings and roaches, and only like in ZvZ matchup, because you can only micro agains similary fast unit with similar range, and in other MU terran and prottos ussualy have upper hand here.
Its just the unit design that was delivered for zerg. Zerg is a swarm, they are suppose to swarm their enemy, no micro them to death. I dont judge wheather its good/bad design, its just how it has been thought of by Blizzard. Zergs are suppose to flak and runby armies. Compare this apects of zerg players, not BL control lol.
And last poit -hos is it possible, that such A-moving race, I mean zerg, has comparable are often higher APM than their adversary? Are they just spamming a-move like 300 times a minute?
My point is that due to how the game is designed the skill... curve is like it is. I mean players will always just play as good as their race/skill allows it, so it's not the players that can do anything about it.
On August 20 2012 22:54 E.L.V.I.S wrote: Come on guys, Slivko has always been a good player, recently he is improving, but in 2010 I knew his name already..
Just because you know him from 2010, that doesn't mean anything. He improved, but that's normal for somebody that remains active and is motivated.
P.S Please stop QQing so much on ladder when you lose, thanks
He's been getting results since IEM Sao Paulo.
Well, I don't think any of these players barring Slivko has enough games against notables to even begin to see anything but random chance. But it is notable that Slivko lost every set to a Korean trained terran before the (latest) patch. Thorzain, Jinro, Polt, Supernova, etc all beat him. And now he lost to Bomber and Mvp. No change, really.
He has been consistently making it to the top 16 or 8 of tournaments though, since before the patch. That speaks to a consistency that shows he isn't a patch Zerg.
Hmm, I'd like to see you write a post about ReleaseToss* and ReleaseTerran*
A Term coined for people who have been playing these fairly strong races since release while Zerg had to figure them out. but when blizzard levels the playing field, they whine and whine about how Imba Zerg is instead of taking the ReleaseZerg route and just figuring out how to win at a disadvantage
(Also, all that changed was overlord speed and Queen GROUND range. They're nerfing creep now and buffing Ravens. So chill)
This thread is hilarious. For few weeks Zergs have been doing better than Terrans and we have now "patchzergs" who otherwise wouldn't be able to win a single game. Yea, right, I guess we should also discuss in retrospective patchterrans who (terrans) were having better winning % against both, protoss and zerg, every month for what, more than a year?
Really incredible, I don't even understand how the thread hasn't been closed yet.
atleast bring EPM in it, having 400 apm but spam clicking your units 5x more isn't relevant. Besides, your numbers aren't correct.
Personally I feel that zerg is too forgiving for the zerg player, not scouting and still being able to hold off alot of attacks is just silly. The same goes for being able to have bad macro, but the race allows for bad macro, so you can spend it all in once whereas other races have to actually keep up with productions.
On August 20 2012 22:53 Irre wrote: The reason people are upset about "patchzergs" is because mechanics in this game just seem to mean very little when its so easy for for a zerg now to just take 3 bases so quickly and tech to t3 deathball while being completely safe due to infestors, and at the same time not have to really do anything but macro up. This style was prevalent before the patch, but the patch made it that much easier to do. DRG and Nestea and Leenock and July at their top points were so impressive because they had incredible mechanics. The new players we see impress by their ability to block aggression and get a deathball. ( Oh yeah and "infestor control"). It just doesn't feel as good to see them win vs a player who has insanely good mechanical skill, and thus people get upset. I miss the days when July was crushing face with insanely good harass and mutaling bane attacks off 3/4 base. Was so fun to watch and I really feel like mutas not really being seen in the MU as much, and all the infestor heavy play has dumbed down zerg play.
Nerchio and Vortix, the players with the most success against terran this past weekend, are both 300+ APM players (~320 and ~310 respectively). Sortof and Slivko are slower (~250 and ~240), but are their results versus terran really that impressive? Nestea plays at ~285 and Leenock at ~275.
Meanwhile, Kas plays at ~240, Thorzain ~190, Lucifron ~240, socke ~225, Grubby ~180 and naniwa ~220.
There are reasons to criticize the development of zerg metagame (it is becoming what people don't like about protoss, amass a deathball and win), but to point to it being easy because of speed is not the right place. Being a succesful zerg in lategame demands a lot of speed, maybe more so than the other races. That may not be true of terran anymore (you need a lot of speed in order to multitask against Z in lategame), but it is definitely true of protoss.
What does APM have to do with what he wrote? Mechanics and APM aren't the same.
They are not the same (but what is meant by 'mechanics', in that context, if not something having to do with being able to do many things in a short period of time?), but they are related and APM puts a limit on the situations in which players can be successful.
On August 20 2012 23:16 m0ck wrote: Nerchio and Vortix, the players with the most success against terran this past weekend, are both 300+ APM players (~320 and ~310 respectively). Sortof and Slivko are slower (~250 and ~240), but are their results versus terran really that impressive? Nestea plays at ~285 and Leenock at ~275.
Meanwhile, Kas plays at ~240, Thorzain ~190, Lucifron ~240, socke ~225, Grubby ~180 and naniwa ~220.
There are reasons to criticize the development of zerg metagame (it is becoming what people don't like about protoss, amass a deathball and win), but to point to it being easy because of speed is not the right place. Being a succesful zerg in lategame demands a lot of speed, maybe more so than the other races. That may not be true of terran anymore (you need a lot of speed in order to multitask against Z in lategame), but it is definitely true of protoss.
APM doesn't matter when you can't make the right decissions or multitask properly. Nice try tho.
Nerchio and Vortix has almost zero multitask capabilities compared to really good players.
You can't just look at win rates, they don't tell the whole story. This is because you're only looking at a select few winrates from televised matches, not at their global win rates (counting qualifiers and open brackets, that are typically not broadcast).
VortiX might have a similar win rate currently to what he had before, but the quality of opponents he's playing against has massively changed because he's suddenly qualifying for big tournaments with big name players instead of only playing in small scale tournaments.
Lets take a look at some tournaments VortiX played pre-patch
Can you honestly say you know most of these players, or even if you do, can you honestly say that these players are world class players? Having a score of 55% win rate against these is not impressive for a professional player.
Now lets take a look at the opponents he's playing AFTER the patch.
The difference between quality of players is insane, he went from barely coming out ahead against semi pro's to doing above average against top tier Koreans and foreigners. "Mysteriously" after the patch, obviously. Even looking at tournament wins this should be obvious. He has won 5 tournaments since patch 1.4.2, that is, he has won 5 tournaments in 2 months. Compared to his previous record of winning about 1 tournament every 2 months, going to winning 5 tournaments in 2 months is quite a substantial difference. Don't let win rates fool you. Instead, look at who they are winning against.
The same basically applies to all of the other patch zergs, however, doing this for just one was enough work as it was. Don't be fooled by win rates, because they do not tell the whole story.
On August 20 2012 23:39 LooZerg wrote: Hmm, I'd like to see you write a post about ReleaseToss* and ReleaseTerran*
A Term coined for people who have been playing these fairly strong races since release while Zerg had to figure them out. but when blizzard levels the playing field, they whine and whine about how Imba Zerg is instead of taking the ReleaseZerg route and just figuring out how to win at a disadvantage
LOL!!! Thank you so much. This is exactly the truth right here.
2010: "Zerg is fine." 2010: "Zergs QQ too much." 2010: "Zergs just need to innovate." 2010: "You can't keep doing the same losing plays and expect to start winning." 2012: "OMG SO IMBA!!!"
Ah how the tables have turned. Zerg was UP for like a year and a half and Terrans were dominating tournaments since release. Go look at 2011 TLPD stats, Terran on top 12 months in a row! And now, one single patch where Terrans aren't so hot and they absolutely lose it. Suck it up, every race has had a chance at being weak and terran has been the strongest for so damn long. It is only a matter of time before blizz nerfs zerg or buffs terran, so everyone just calm down.
It took like 2 years for blizzard to finally turn the dominant race into the weak race, but thank god they finally achieved it. Not just because it allows me to turn all those ridiculous comments about Zerg when they were weak back onto the Terrans, but because honestly struggle is good. Difficulty leads to better play, to more innovation, to superior strategies. Also, it helps for people to be in another's shoes for a bit so they learn a little humility and quit making ridiculous threads like "Are whiny people attracted to Zerg?"
On August 20 2012 22:53 Irre wrote: The reason people are upset about "patchzergs" is because mechanics in this game just seem to mean very little when its so easy for for a zerg now to just take 3 bases so quickly and tech to t3 deathball while being completely safe due to infestors, and at the same time not have to really do anything but macro up. This style was prevalent before the patch, but the patch made it that much easier to do. DRG and Nestea and Leenock and July at their top points were so impressive because they had incredible mechanics. The new players we see impress by their ability to block aggression and get a deathball. ( Oh yeah and "infestor control"). It just doesn't feel as good to see them win vs a player who has insanely good mechanical skill, and thus people get upset. I miss the days when July was crushing face with insanely good harass and mutaling bane attacks off 3/4 base. Was so fun to watch and I really feel like mutas not really being seen in the MU as much, and all the infestor heavy play has dumbed down zerg play.
Nerchio and Vortix, the players with the most success against terran this past weekend, are both 300+ APM players (~320 and ~310 respectively). Sortof and Slivko are slower (~250 and ~240), but are their results versus terran really that impressive? Nestea plays at ~285 and Leenock at ~275.
Meanwhile, Kas plays at ~240, Thorzain ~190, Lucifron ~240, socke ~225, Grubby ~180 and naniwa ~220.
There are reasons to criticize the development of zerg metagame (it is becoming what people don't like about protoss, amass a deathball and win), but to point to it being easy because of speed is not the right place. Being a succesful zerg in lategame demands a lot of speed, maybe more so than the other races. That may not be true of terran anymore (you need a lot of speed in order to multitask against Z in lategame), but it is definitely true of protoss.
What does APM have to do with what he wrote? Mechanics and APM aren't the same.
They are not the same (but what is meant by 'mechanics', in that context, if not something having to do with being able to do many things in a short period of time?), but they are related and APM puts a limit on the situations in which players can be successful.
Being fast as a player is a good thing yes, but the APM counter isn´t a good representation of this. You can download the replays aswell, nerchio has nowhere close as 310 apm vs the MVP games. His EPM is around 120~ while his apm is around 236 on atlantis spaceship. You could clearly see that the multi tasking of MVP was hurting the ''patchzergs''. the constant denying of bases and dropping in multiple places while losing infestors in the middle of the map. And still this isn't punishing enough for the zerg, because hivetech is extremely strong.
You can't just look at win rates, they don't tell the whole story. This is because you're only looking at a select few winrates from televised matches, not at their global win rates (counting qualifiers and open brackets, that are typically not broadcast).
VortiX might have a similar win rate currently to what he had before, but the quality of opponents he's playing against has massively changed because he's suddenly qualifying for big tournaments with big name players instead of only playing in small scale tournaments.
Lets take a look at some tournaments VortiX played pre-patch
Can you honestly say you know most of these players, or even if you do, can you honestly say that these players are world class players? Having a score of 55% win rate against these is not impressive for a professional player.
Now lets take a look at the opponents he's playing AFTER the patch.
The difference between quality of players is insane, he went from barely coming out ahead against semi pro's to doing above average against top tier Koreans and foreigners. "Mysteriously" after the patch, obviously. Even looking at tournament wins this should be obvious. He has won 5 tournaments since patch 1.4.2, that is, he has won 5 tournaments in 2 months. Compared to his previous record of winning about 1 tournament every 2 months, going to winning 5 tournaments in 2 months, that's quite a substantial difference. Don't let win rates fool you. Instead, look at who they are winning against.
The same basically applies to all of the other patch zergs, however, doing this for just one was enough work as it was. Don't be fooled by win rates, because they do not tell the whole story.
Are you kidding me? A 55% winrate against those opponents was good -- not amazing, but respectable and good. You're seeing names such as Nerchio, Bly, Dimaga.. and trying to downplay them? Deadset mate, stop trying to talk about balance when things like these are your arguments. You have no clue.
On August 20 2012 23:50 tgun wrote: Are you kidding me? A 55% winrate against those opponents was good -- not amazing, but respectable and good. You're seeing names such as Nerchio, Bly, Dimaga.. and trying to downplay them? Deadset mate, stop trying to talk about balance when things like these are your arguments. You have no clue.
The good players you mentioned are all zergs, mate.
On August 20 2012 23:43 BadgerBadger8264 wrote: You can't just look at win rates, they don't tell the whole story. This is because you're only looking at a select few winrates from televised matches, not at their global win rates (counting qualifiers and open brackets, that are typically not broadcast).
VortiX might have a similar win rate currently to what he had before, but the quality of opponents he's playing against has massively changed because he's suddenly qualifying for big tournaments with big name players instead of only playing in small scale tournaments.
Lets take a look at some tournaments VortiX played pre-patch
Can you honestly say you know most of these players, or even if you do, can you honestly say that these players are world class players? Having a score of 55% win rate against these is not impressive for a professional player.
Now lets take a look at the opponents he's playing AFTER the patch.
The difference between quality of players is insane, he went from barely coming out ahead against semi pro's to doing above average against top tier Koreans and foreigners. "Mysteriously" after the patch, obviously. Even looking at tournament wins this should be obvious. He has won 5 tournaments since patch 1.4.2, that is, he has won 5 tournaments in 2 months. Compared to his previous record of winning about 1 tournament every 2 months, going to winning 5 tournaments in 2 months is quite a substantial difference. Don't let win rates fool you. Instead, look at who they are winning against.
The same basically applies to all of the other patch zergs, however, doing this for just one was enough work as it was. Don't be fooled by win rates, because they do not tell the whole story.
don't be fooled by opponents, because they do not tell the whole story. Did you look at before patch zvz and after patch? See the difference? He is just a patch zvz'er.
I use the same logic as you, and come to a different conclusion, i wonder who's right?
On August 20 2012 23:43 BadgerBadger8264 wrote: You can't just look at win rates, they don't tell the whole story. This is because you're only looking at a select few winrates from televised matches, not at their global win rates (counting qualifiers and open brackets, that are typically not broadcast).
VortiX might have a similar win rate currently to what he had before, but the quality of opponents he's playing against has massively changed because he's suddenly qualifying for big tournaments with big name players instead of only playing in small scale tournaments.
Lets take a look at some tournaments VortiX played pre-patch
Can you honestly say you know most of these players, or even if you do, can you honestly say that these players are world class players? Having a score of 55% win rate against these is not impressive for a professional player.
Now lets take a look at the opponents he's playing AFTER the patch.
The difference between quality of players is insane, he went from barely coming out ahead against semi pro's to doing above average against top tier Koreans and foreigners. "Mysteriously" after the patch, obviously. Even looking at tournament wins this should be obvious. He has won 5 tournaments since patch 1.4.2, that is, he has won 5 tournaments in 2 months. Compared to his previous record of winning about 1 tournament every 2 months, going to winning 5 tournaments in 2 months is quite a substantial difference. Don't let win rates fool you. Instead, look at who they are winning against.
The same basically applies to all of the other patch zergs, however, doing this for just one was enough work as it was. Don't be fooled by win rates, because they do not tell the whole story.
While he wins against way better players, those people are also Zerg, prepatch VortiX lost against people like DIMAGA, bly and syz, while after the patch he wins against people like Golden, darkforce and Revival with ease. While the patch gave him a boost for sure ( obviously, since his race got buffed) he also improved as a player.
On August 20 2012 22:53 Irre wrote: The reason people are upset about "patchzergs" is because mechanics in this game just seem to mean very little when its so easy for for a zerg now to just take 3 bases so quickly and tech to t3 deathball while being completely safe due to infestors, and at the same time not have to really do anything but macro up. This style was prevalent before the patch, but the patch made it that much easier to do. DRG and Nestea and Leenock and July at their top points were so impressive because they had incredible mechanics. The new players we see impress by their ability to block aggression and get a deathball. ( Oh yeah and "infestor control"). It just doesn't feel as good to see them win vs a player who has insanely good mechanical skill, and thus people get upset. I miss the days when July was crushing face with insanely good harass and mutaling bane attacks off 3/4 base. Was so fun to watch and I really feel like mutas not really being seen in the MU as much, and all the infestor heavy play has dumbed down zerg play.
Nerchio and Vortix, the players with the most success against terran this past weekend, are both 300+ APM players (~320 and ~310 respectively). Sortof and Slivko are slower (~250 and ~240), but are their results versus terran really that impressive? Nestea plays at ~285 and Leenock at ~275.
Meanwhile, Kas plays at ~240, Thorzain ~190, Lucifron ~240, socke ~225, Grubby ~180 and naniwa ~220.
There are reasons to criticize the development of zerg metagame (it is becoming what people don't like about protoss, amass a deathball and win), but to point to it being easy because of speed is not the right place. Being a succesful zerg in lategame demands a lot of speed, maybe more so than the other races. That may not be true of terran anymore (you need a lot of speed in order to multitask against Z in lategame), but it is definitely true of protoss.
What does APM have to do with what he wrote? Mechanics and APM aren't the same.
They are not the same (but what is meant by 'mechanics', in that context, if not something having to do with being able to do many things in a short period of time?), but they are related and APM puts a limit on the situations in which players can be successful.
Being fast as a player is a good thing yes, but the APM counter isn´t a good representation of this. You can download the replays aswell, nerchio has nowhere close as 310 apm vs the MVP games. His EPM is around 120~ while his apm is around 236 on atlantis spaceship. You could clearly see that the multi tasking of MVP was hurting the ''patchzergs''. the constant denying of bases and dropping in multiple places while losing infestors in the middle of the map. And still this isn't punishing enough for the zerg, because hivetech is extremely strong.
I'm lifting my numbers from this weekends replays. And yes, MVP is faster still (~360) and is able to use his speed to punish the zergs. And he won 3-1 and 3-1 doing that.
Funny you should mention eAPM (which means what, exactly? I see no reason to believe that it is a better representation of player-speed). Vortix ~183, Nerchio ~163 and MVP ~155.
On August 20 2012 23:50 tgun wrote: Are you kidding me? A 55% winrate against those opponents was good -- not amazing, but respectable and good. You're seeing names such as Nerchio, Bly, Dimaga.. and trying to downplay them? Deadset mate, stop trying to talk about balance when things like these are your arguments. You have no clue.
The good players you mentioned are all zergs, mate.
ZvZ isn't impacted by balance.
My point still stands, sorry. Try again.
well, to make it short: nope, you don't even have a point, so how could it still stand?
all you do is talk nonsense and try to interpret things you don't have a clue about with a method that doesn't make sense with a sample size which is a joke.
On August 20 2012 21:35 Swiipii wrote: I don't think that anyone is denying the fact that Zerg are doing quite well vs Terrans atm . But saying that Zerg is just "A+click trololol sdsdsdsds 1a1a1a1a" and that SortOf/JR/etc.. can be compared to players like DRG or even Stephano is just bullshit .
Whether they are pre-patch Zergs or not they aren't winning anything and i am sure they never will (at the highest level of play).
Looking forward to the next MLG and watch some "real" TvZ .
See, I don't think anyone is saying that every Zerg is just a+click 1a1a1a1 and that SortOf = DRG; what annoys people is that there is very little difference in results between players like SortOf/JR/Vortix who are obviously not anywhere close to being Code S levels in their control and mechanics etc compared to Code S level zergs, at least in ZvT. It's entirely possible that the current ZvT situation is very temporary, but in the meantime it's frustrating watching that kind of play going as far as it did in tournaments like IEM which was 'supposed' to be pretty loaded with talent.
I don't want to say that Vortix or JohnnyRecco or whatever is talentless and bad - but I don't see how can anyone deny that their games in IEM & TSL were awful in every sense of that word. It's obvious that the way the game was patched has a lot to do with viability of the style of play they used, hence the hate on the patches and the 'patchzergs'. It's silly to sit around guessing whether they'd be any good without the queen / infestor patches or not (or if the patches were different), but looking at how they play - in the game as it is now, 'patchzerg' does seem like a pretty fitting name. :p
Did you even watch those games ? ForGG's play at IEM against Vortix was just embarrassing to the Terran race . And you can wonder how did he took 3rd place at Assembly .
Again not saying that those players are not surfing on the patch wave but stop being overdramatic (not pointing at you in particular of course) . Every one kept their mouth shut when Nestea got rolled by Puma and Kas or when Strelok took a game from him or even when Demuslim defeated Nerchio in group stages . Upsets happens . As long as I don't see JR or SortOf taking a game from players like MKP, Taeja, Ryung or even Polt I am cool with it .
And for the record, SuperNova's TvZ is pretty meh . Nestea won twice against him in the last GSL (yeah the same Nestea who struggles A LOT in ZvT and who barely reach a 50% ratio in the match up) and if I remember correctly he complained about his TvZ at IEM Sao Paulo (where he lost 3-1 to Violet) .
On August 20 2012 23:41 TastiC wrote: atleast bring EPM in it, having 400 apm but spam clicking your units 5x more isn't relevant. Besides, your numbers aren't correct.
Personally I feel that zerg is too forgiving for the zerg player, not scouting and still being able to hold off alot of attacks is just silly. The same goes for being able to have bad macro, but the race allows for bad macro, so you can spend it all in once whereas other races have to actually keep up with productions.
THis is both true and false.
Zerg is reactionary race, you are not supposed to build units prematurely, because for instance roche ling is so easly countered by tank helion. Zerg cannot drop a money-scan in opponents base to see what is his tech choice. Zergs are by design supposed to stockpile money in order to be able to react if they see what's opponents army composition.
While I agree it doesn't punish bad macro players, zergs pays for such feature with weaker units overall.
On the other hand, I've seen terran work regardless of tech choice on recent IEM to some extent.
On August 20 2012 23:50 tgun wrote: Are you kidding me? A 55% winrate against those opponents was good -- not amazing, but respectable and good. You're seeing names such as Nerchio, Bly, Dimaga.. and trying to downplay them? Deadset mate, stop trying to talk about balance when things like these are your arguments. You have no clue.
The good players you mentioned are all zergs, mate.
ZvZ isn't impacted by balance.
My point still stands, sorry. Try again.
Yeah, and all the other players, he beat. Your point doesn't stand at all..
On August 20 2012 23:43 BadgerBadger8264 wrote: You can't just look at win rates, they don't tell the whole story. This is because you're only looking at a select few winrates from televised matches, not at their global win rates (counting qualifiers and open brackets, that are typically not broadcast).
VortiX might have a similar win rate currently to what he had before, but the quality of opponents he's playing against has massively changed because he's suddenly qualifying for big tournaments with big name players instead of only playing in small scale tournaments.
Lets take a look at some tournaments VortiX played pre-patch
Can you honestly say you know most of these players, or even if you do, can you honestly say that these players are world class players? Having a score of 55% win rate against these is not impressive for a professional player.
Now lets take a look at the opponents he's playing AFTER the patch.
The difference between quality of players is insane, he went from barely coming out ahead against semi pro's to doing above average against top tier Koreans and foreigners. "Mysteriously" after the patch, obviously. Even looking at tournament wins this should be obvious. He has won 5 tournaments since patch 1.4.2, that is, he has won 5 tournaments in 2 months. Compared to his previous record of winning about 1 tournament every 2 months, going to winning 5 tournaments in 2 months is quite a substantial difference. Don't let win rates fool you. Instead, look at who they are winning against.
The same basically applies to all of the other patch zergs, however, doing this for just one was enough work as it was. Don't be fooled by win rates, because they do not tell the whole story.
While he wins against way better players, those people are also Zerg, prepatch VortiX lost against people like DIMAGA, bly and syz, while after the patch he wins against people like Golden, darkforce and Revival with ease. While the patch gave him a boost for sure ( obviously, since his race got buffed) he also improved as a player.
While he wins against way better players, those people are also Zerg, prepatch VortiX lost against people like DIMAGA, bly and syz, while after the patch he wins against people like Golden, darkforce and Revival with ease. While the patch gave him a boost for sure ( obviously, since his race got buffed) he also improved as a player.
He won against Nerchio pre-patch as well. And, I didn't include these three tournaments because I didn't think they were relevant to a discussion on ZvP and ZvT, I will if people think his "ZvZ" is such a big deal. I'll update my original post with them as well. All post patch.
On August 20 2012 22:53 Irre wrote: The reason people are upset about "patchzergs" is because mechanics in this game just seem to mean very little when its so easy for for a zerg now to just take 3 bases so quickly and tech to t3 deathball while being completely safe due to infestors, and at the same time not have to really do anything but macro up. This style was prevalent before the patch, but the patch made it that much easier to do. DRG and Nestea and Leenock and July at their top points were so impressive because they had incredible mechanics. The new players we see impress by their ability to block aggression and get a deathball. ( Oh yeah and "infestor control"). It just doesn't feel as good to see them win vs a player who has insanely good mechanical skill, and thus people get upset. I miss the days when July was crushing face with insanely good harass and mutaling bane attacks off 3/4 base. Was so fun to watch and I really feel like mutas not really being seen in the MU as much, and all the infestor heavy play has dumbed down zerg play.
Nerchio and Vortix, the players with the most success against terran this past weekend, are both 300+ APM players (~320 and ~310 respectively). Sortof and Slivko are slower (~250 and ~240), but are their results versus terran really that impressive? Nestea plays at ~285 and Leenock at ~275.
Meanwhile, Kas plays at ~240, Thorzain ~190, Lucifron ~240, socke ~225, Grubby ~180 and naniwa ~220.
There are reasons to criticize the development of zerg metagame (it is becoming what people don't like about protoss, amass a deathball and win), but to point to it being easy because of speed is not the right place. Being a succesful zerg in lategame demands a lot of speed, maybe more so than the other races. That may not be true of terran anymore (you need a lot of speed in order to multitask against Z in lategame), but it is definitely true of protoss.
What does APM have to do with what he wrote? Mechanics and APM aren't the same.
They are not the same (but what is meant by 'mechanics', in that context, if not something having to do with being able to do many things in a short period of time?), but they are related and APM puts a limit on the situations in which players can be successful.
Being fast as a player is a good thing yes, but the APM counter isn´t a good representation of this. You can download the replays aswell, nerchio has nowhere close as 310 apm vs the MVP games. His EPM is around 120~ while his apm is around 236 on atlantis spaceship. You could clearly see that the multi tasking of MVP was hurting the ''patchzergs''. the constant denying of bases and dropping in multiple places while losing infestors in the middle of the map. And still this isn't punishing enough for the zerg, because hivetech is extremely strong.
I'm lifting my numbers from this weekends replays. And yes, MVP is faster still (~360) and is able to use his speed to punish the zergs. And he won 3-1 and 3-1 doing that.
Funny you should mention eAPM (which means what, exactly? I see no reason to believe that it is a better representation of player-speed). Vortix ~183, Nerchio ~163 and MVP ~155.
Oh, really? Then please direct me to the games where nerchios EPM was actually higher and in the 163? Same for Vortix? Please don't throw random numbers around.
The reason why APM is a useless statistic, is because you can have 300 apm but not actually do anything of worth. EPM ignores this for the most part and is the more realistic statisitic. Which I still feel isn't a representation of skills.
On August 20 2012 21:35 Swiipii wrote: I don't think that anyone is denying the fact that Zerg are doing quite well vs Terrans atm . But saying that Zerg is just "A+click trololol sdsdsdsds 1a1a1a1a" and that SortOf/JR/etc.. can be compared to players like DRG or even Stephano is just bullshit .
Whether they are pre-patch Zergs or not they aren't winning anything and i am sure they never will (at the highest level of play).
Looking forward to the next MLG and watch some "real" TvZ .
See, I don't think anyone is saying that every Zerg is just a+click 1a1a1a1 and that SortOf = DRG; what annoys people is that there is very little difference in results between players like SortOf/JR/Vortix who are obviously not anywhere close to being Code S levels in their control and mechanics etc compared to Code S level zergs, at least in ZvT. It's entirely possible that the current ZvT situation is very temporary, but in the meantime it's frustrating watching that kind of play going as far as it did in tournaments like IEM which was 'supposed' to be pretty loaded with talent.
I don't want to say that Vortix or JohnnyRecco or whatever is talentless and bad - but I don't see how can anyone deny that their games in IEM & TSL were awful in every sense of that word. It's obvious that the way the game was patched has a lot to do with viability of the style of play they used, hence the hate on the patches and the 'patchzergs'. It's silly to sit around guessing whether they'd be any good without the queen / infestor patches or not (or if the patches were different), but looking at how they play - in the game as it is now, 'patchzerg' does seem like a pretty fitting name. :p
Did you even watch those games ? ForGG's play at IEM against Vortix was just embarrassing to the Terran race . And you can wonder how did he took 3rd place at Assembly .
Again not saying that those players are not surfing on the patch wave but stop being overdramatic (not pointing at you in particular of course) . Every one kept their mouth shut when Nestea got rolled by Puma and Kas or when Strelok took a game from him or even when Demuslim defeated Nerchio in group stages . Upsets happens . As long as I don't see JR or SortOf taking a game from players like MKP, Taeja, Ryung or even Polt I am cool with it .
And for the record, SuperNova's TvZ is pretty meh . Nestea won twice against him in the last GSL (yeah the same Nestea who struggles A LOT in ZvT and who barely reach a 50% ratio in the match up) and if I remember correctly he complained about his TvZ at IEM Sao Paulo (where he lost 3-1 to Violet) .
NesTea being defeated by PuMa and Kas isn't an upset lol. NesTea is far from being a top zerg, except in GSL settings where he is decent. In live events settings he just isn't at the level of PuMa, Kas or other players. Demuslim defeating Nerchio isn't really an upset either, both are around at the same skill level? JRecco taking 3 games from Keen is the same as him taking games off of MKP, TaeJa or Ryung, it should not ever happen.
On August 20 2012 22:53 Irre wrote: The reason people are upset about "patchzergs" is because mechanics in this game just seem to mean very little when its so easy for for a zerg now to just take 3 bases so quickly and tech to t3 deathball while being completely safe due to infestors, and at the same time not have to really do anything but macro up. This style was prevalent before the patch, but the patch made it that much easier to do. DRG and Nestea and Leenock and July at their top points were so impressive because they had incredible mechanics. The new players we see impress by their ability to block aggression and get a deathball. ( Oh yeah and "infestor control"). It just doesn't feel as good to see them win vs a player who has insanely good mechanical skill, and thus people get upset. I miss the days when July was crushing face with insanely good harass and mutaling bane attacks off 3/4 base. Was so fun to watch and I really feel like mutas not really being seen in the MU as much, and all the infestor heavy play has dumbed down zerg play.
Nerchio and Vortix, the players with the most success against terran this past weekend, are both 300+ APM players (~320 and ~310 respectively). Sortof and Slivko are slower (~250 and ~240), but are their results versus terran really that impressive? Nestea plays at ~285 and Leenock at ~275.
Meanwhile, Kas plays at ~240, Thorzain ~190, Lucifron ~240, socke ~225, Grubby ~180 and naniwa ~220.
There are reasons to criticize the development of zerg metagame (it is becoming what people don't like about protoss, amass a deathball and win), but to point to it being easy because of speed is not the right place. Being a succesful zerg in lategame demands a lot of speed, maybe more so than the other races. That may not be true of terran anymore (you need a lot of speed in order to multitask against Z in lategame), but it is definitely true of protoss.
What does APM have to do with what he wrote? Mechanics and APM aren't the same.
They are not the same (but what is meant by 'mechanics', in that context, if not something having to do with being able to do many things in a short period of time?), but they are related and APM puts a limit on the situations in which players can be successful.
Being fast as a player is a good thing yes, but the APM counter isn´t a good representation of this. You can download the replays aswell, nerchio has nowhere close as 310 apm vs the MVP games. His EPM is around 120~ while his apm is around 236 on atlantis spaceship. You could clearly see that the multi tasking of MVP was hurting the ''patchzergs''. the constant denying of bases and dropping in multiple places while losing infestors in the middle of the map. And still this isn't punishing enough for the zerg, because hivetech is extremely strong.
I'm lifting my numbers from this weekends replays. And yes, MVP is faster still (~360) and is able to use his speed to punish the zergs. And he won 3-1 and 3-1 doing that.
Funny you should mention eAPM (which means what, exactly? I see no reason to believe that it is a better representation of player-speed). Vortix ~183, Nerchio ~163 and MVP ~155.
Oh, really? Then please direct me to the games where nerchios EPM was actually higher and in the 163? Same for Vortix? Please don't throw random numbers around.
The reason why APM is a useless statistic, is because you can have 300 apm but not actually do anything of worth. EPM ignores this for the most part and is the more realistic statisitic. Which I still feel isn't a representation of skills.
Could you explain to me what exactly is done to the APM number to create eAPM?
I use Sc2gears to create an average over multiple replays. You can download replay-packs from the ESL-site. They are based on 12 replays for MVP, 13 for Nerchio and 10 for Vortix.
Questioning someones success because u have problems with zergs and give them a title "patchzergs". I thought u will add Nerchio too and ashame yourself. If zerg is so op then tell me wheres Idra idol of teamliquid, wheres TLO, Sheth, Ret ? They all play zergs even prepatch and they are owned by koreans in every matchup.
The most funny thing are players who whine and make some "patchzergs" names arent even in masters league They struggle in diamond, plat,gold or even worse but they talk alot about balance instead of improving theirs macro. Balance is the problem in grandmaster/high master elo. Your only enemy dear whiners is macro.
On August 20 2012 22:53 Irre wrote: The reason people are upset about "patchzergs" is because mechanics in this game just seem to mean very little when its so easy for for a zerg now to just take 3 bases so quickly and tech to t3 deathball while being completely safe due to infestors, and at the same time not have to really do anything but macro up. This style was prevalent before the patch, but the patch made it that much easier to do. DRG and Nestea and Leenock and July at their top points were so impressive because they had incredible mechanics. The new players we see impress by their ability to block aggression and get a deathball. ( Oh yeah and "infestor control"). It just doesn't feel as good to see them win vs a player who has insanely good mechanical skill, and thus people get upset. I miss the days when July was crushing face with insanely good harass and mutaling bane attacks off 3/4 base. Was so fun to watch and I really feel like mutas not really being seen in the MU as much, and all the infestor heavy play has dumbed down zerg play.
Nerchio and Vortix, the players with the most success against terran this past weekend, are both 300+ APM players (~320 and ~310 respectively). Sortof and Slivko are slower (~250 and ~240), but are their results versus terran really that impressive? Nestea plays at ~285 and Leenock at ~275.
Meanwhile, Kas plays at ~240, Thorzain ~190, Lucifron ~240, socke ~225, Grubby ~180 and naniwa ~220.
There are reasons to criticize the development of zerg metagame (it is becoming what people don't like about protoss, amass a deathball and win), but to point to it being easy because of speed is not the right place. Being a succesful zerg in lategame demands a lot of speed, maybe more so than the other races. That may not be true of terran anymore (you need a lot of speed in order to multitask against Z in lategame), but it is definitely true of protoss.
What does APM have to do with what he wrote? Mechanics and APM aren't the same.
They are not the same (but what is meant by 'mechanics', in that context, if not something having to do with being able to do many things in a short period of time?), but they are related and APM puts a limit on the situations in which players can be successful.
Being fast as a player is a good thing yes, but the APM counter isn´t a good representation of this. You can download the replays aswell, nerchio has nowhere close as 310 apm vs the MVP games. His EPM is around 120~ while his apm is around 236 on atlantis spaceship. You could clearly see that the multi tasking of MVP was hurting the ''patchzergs''. the constant denying of bases and dropping in multiple places while losing infestors in the middle of the map. And still this isn't punishing enough for the zerg, because hivetech is extremely strong.
I'm lifting my numbers from this weekends replays. And yes, MVP is faster still (~360) and is able to use his speed to punish the zergs. And he won 3-1 and 3-1 doing that.
Funny you should mention eAPM (which means what, exactly? I see no reason to believe that it is a better representation of player-speed). Vortix ~183, Nerchio ~163 and MVP ~155.
Oh, really? Then please direct me to the games where nerchios EPM was actually higher and in the 163? Same for Vortix? Please don't throw random numbers around.
The reason why APM is a useless statistic, is because you can have 300 apm but not actually do anything of worth. EPM ignores this for the most part and is the more realistic statisitic. Which I still feel isn't a representation of skills.
Could you explain to me what exactly is done to the APM number to create eAPM?
I use Sc2gears to create an average over multiple replays. You can download replay-packs from the ESL-site. They are based on 12 replays for MVP, 13 for Nerchio and 10 for Vortix.
I don't want to actually be drawn away from the point I was trying to make. APM/EPM isn't a relevant thing to consider in top level play.
On August 21 2012 00:08 AzoriuS wrote: Questioning someones success because u have problems with zergs and give them a title "patchzergs". I thought u will add Nerchio too and ashame yourself. If zerg is so op then tell me wheres Idra idol of teamliquid, wheres TLO, Sheth, Ret ? They all play zergs even prepatch and they are owned by koreans in every matchup.
The most funny thing are players who whine and make some "patchzergs" names arent even in masters league They struggle in diamond, plat,gold or even worse but they talk alot about balance instead of improving theirs macro. Balance is the problem in grandmaster/high master elo. Your only enemy dear whiners is macro.
This is such a bullshit argument.
Not everybody is claiming that Zergs somehow became unbeatable, merely that they are easier to get to the stage where they become a very powerful race, that they have an extremely strong lategame, but that was mitigated in the past with the difficulty of achieving said compositions.
For example, most Protoss players don't claim PvZ is imbalanced in terms of the balance, but they dislike the form the matchup takes, i.e 2 base allin, or a pre-BL Collosus timing, or Vortex vs BL/Infestor is how the vast majority of PvZs play out. Way I see it the Terrans are decrying the current state of TvZ following a similar pattern, with the claim the Queen range update is a big contributory factor to this state of affairs.
The game is progressing in a way that now it's not just Protoss that have a deathball that they rush to in their matchups, but Zergs now do it too. It's not good for SC2 from a spectator perspective.
On August 20 2012 23:39 LooZerg wrote: Hmm, I'd like to see you write a post about ReleaseToss* and ReleaseTerran*
A Term coined for people who have been playing these fairly strong races since release while Zerg had to figure them out. but when blizzard levels the playing field, they whine and whine about how Imba Zerg is instead of taking the ReleaseZerg route and just figuring out how to win at a disadvantage
LOL!!! Thank you so much. This is exactly the truth right here.
2010: "Zerg is fine." 2010: "Zergs QQ too much." 2010: "Zergs just need to innovate." 2010: "You can't keep doing the same losing plays and expect to start winning." 2012: "OMG SO IMBA!!!"
Ah how the tables have turned. Zerg was UP for like a year and a half and Terrans were dominating tournaments since release. Go look at 2011 TLPD stats, Terran on top 12 months in a row! And now, one single patch where Terrans aren't so hot and they absolutely lose it. Suck it up, every race has had a chance at being weak and terran has been the strongest for so damn long. It is only a matter of time before blizz nerfs zerg or buffs terran, so everyone just calm down.
It took like 2 years for blizzard to finally turn the dominant race into the weak race, but thank god they finally achieved it. Not just because it allows me to turn all those ridiculous comments about Zerg when they were weak back onto the Terrans, but because honestly struggle is good. Difficulty leads to better play, to more innovation, to superior strategies. Also, it helps for people to be in another's shoes for a bit so they learn a little humility and quit making ridiculous threads like "Are whiny people attracted to Zerg?"
This argument misses the point kind of. One, patch zergs are mostly foreign phenomenon as far as highest level of play is concerned. Why are there no Korean patch zergs and so many of them in foreign scene ? Second, if it was only about zergs finally being on the same level as the other two races, why only foreign zergs can consistently cause problems for Korean pros ? Are people that are playing zerg outside of Korea just naturally more skilled and were just being held back by imbalance before ? This would be similar argument as was made so long for Terrans in Korea.
My own hypothesis is that with the patch zerg became the most "flat" race in terms of skill differentiation. Basically a lot of zergs thanks to a patch got elevated to a top foreigner level. But that is where the patch ends, to achieve anything higher you need to be actually good. Thus no such phenomenon in Korea due to higher level of play. Second most flat race is protoss, terran is most differentiated. The whole problem is caused by bad design of zerg that makes skill differentiation at top foreigner level too flat. Similarly flat as it is for protoss in some ranges in lower leagues.
Another thing that happened is that some niche zerg plays that were unstable before the patch, became much more stable due to either patch or metagame shifts. And since it seems foreign scene has more such niche styles, patch would affect it more.
Anyway, anything said on the topic is more or less speculation.
The first question to ask is how much of the SC2 scene do you actually follow (and care about). If it's just the very top (GSL & top EU / NA events) everything seems right and zergs by no means feel OP.
I know, the level of this cup is nowhere near a premier event with a bunch of Code-S invites. But this is competitive gaming and it seems that zergs are a bit too good here. They keep pushing the most spectacular TvX match-ups towards extinction, making the cup not that good too watch.
I can certainly live with that - it is no problem to kill the stream at the point it becomes the usual ZvZ / PvZ fest. Still, I'd prefer to have a better chance for good games involving all three races at this competitive / semi-pro level too.
On August 21 2012 00:08 AzoriuS wrote: Questioning someones success because u have problems with zergs and give them a title "patchzergs". I thought u will add Nerchio too and ashame yourself. If zerg is so op then tell me wheres Idra idol of teamliquid, wheres TLO, Sheth, Ret ? They all play zergs even prepatch and they are owned by koreans in every matchup.
The most funny thing are players who whine and make some "patchzergs" names arent even in masters league They struggle in diamond, plat,gold or even worse but they talk alot about balance instead of improving theirs macro. Balance is the problem in grandmaster/high master elo. Your only enemy dear whiners is macro.
THANK YOU! its funny to see some low league players trying to argue with gm players about balance tho. but ye its really disrespectful calling people patchzergs or whatever if you really dont know anything about the person ... god knows he couldve played 18hrs/day for the last 3 months and you disregard such hard workethic by saying patchzerg while you self are stuck in silver and rather whine about balance than actually playing and improving. stop it for gods sake
On August 21 2012 00:08 AzoriuS wrote: Questioning someones success because u have problems with zergs and give them a title "patchzergs". I thought u will add Nerchio too and ashame yourself. If zerg is so op then tell me wheres Idra idol of teamliquid, wheres TLO, Sheth, Ret ? They all play zergs even prepatch and they are owned by koreans in every matchup.
The most funny thing are players who whine and make some "patchzergs" names arent even in masters league They struggle in diamond, plat,gold or even worse but they talk alot about balance instead of improving theirs macro. Balance is the problem in grandmaster/high master elo. Your only enemy dear whiners is macro.
Lol is this for real... Why would they even take games off koreans? -;-. Most koreans are better than the players you quoted so I don't see your point.
On August 20 2012 21:35 Swiipii wrote: I don't think that anyone is denying the fact that Zerg are doing quite well vs Terrans atm . But saying that Zerg is just "A+click trololol sdsdsdsds 1a1a1a1a" and that SortOf/JR/etc.. can be compared to players like DRG or even Stephano is just bullshit .
Whether they are pre-patch Zergs or not they aren't winning anything and i am sure they never will (at the highest level of play).
Looking forward to the next MLG and watch some "real" TvZ .
See, I don't think anyone is saying that every Zerg is just a+click 1a1a1a1 and that SortOf = DRG; what annoys people is that there is very little difference in results between players like SortOf/JR/Vortix who are obviously not anywhere close to being Code S levels in their control and mechanics etc compared to Code S level zergs, at least in ZvT. It's entirely possible that the current ZvT situation is very temporary, but in the meantime it's frustrating watching that kind of play going as far as it did in tournaments like IEM which was 'supposed' to be pretty loaded with talent.
I don't want to say that Vortix or JohnnyRecco or whatever is talentless and bad - but I don't see how can anyone deny that their games in IEM & TSL were awful in every sense of that word. It's obvious that the way the game was patched has a lot to do with viability of the style of play they used, hence the hate on the patches and the 'patchzergs'. It's silly to sit around guessing whether they'd be any good without the queen / infestor patches or not (or if the patches were different), but looking at how they play - in the game as it is now, 'patchzerg' does seem like a pretty fitting name. :p
Did you even watch those games ? ForGG's play at IEM against Vortix was just embarrassing to the Terran race . And you can wonder how did he took 3rd place at Assembly .
Again not saying that those players are not surfing on the patch wave but stop being overdramatic (not pointing at you in particular of course) . Every one kept their mouth shut when Nestea got rolled by Puma and Kas or when Strelok took a game from him or even when Demuslim defeated Nerchio in group stages . Upsets happens . As long as I don't see JR or SortOf taking a game from players like MKP, Taeja, Ryung or even Polt I am cool with it .
And for the record, SuperNova's TvZ is pretty meh . Nestea won twice against him in the last GSL (yeah the same Nestea who struggles A LOT in ZvT and who barely reach a 50% ratio in the match up) and if I remember correctly he complained about his TvZ at IEM Sao Paulo (where he lost 3-1 to Violet) .
NesTea being defeated by PuMa and Kas isn't an upset lol. NesTea is far from being a top zerg, except in GSL settings where he is decent. In live events settings he just isn't at the level of PuMa, Kas or other players. Demuslim defeating Nerchio isn't really an upset either, both are around at the same skill level? JRecco taking 3 games from Keen is the same as him taking games off of MKP, TaeJa or Ryung, it should not ever happen.
Gets in every code S in existence and reigned since the dark ages of zerg. gets called not a top zerg. Yea that ro8 was decent, not good, just decent... Excuse me?
On August 21 2012 00:08 AzoriuS wrote: Questioning someones success because u have problems with zergs and give them a title "patchzergs". I thought u will add Nerchio too and ashame yourself. If zerg is so op then tell me wheres Idra idol of teamliquid, wheres TLO, Sheth, Ret ? They all play zergs even prepatch and they are owned by koreans in every matchup.
The most funny thing are players who whine and make some "patchzergs" names arent even in masters league They struggle in diamond, plat,gold or even worse but they talk alot about balance instead of improving theirs macro. Balance is the problem in grandmaster/high master elo. Your only enemy dear whiners is macro.
Lol is this for real... Why would they even take games off koreans? -;-. Most koreans are better than the players you quoted so I don't see your point.
His point is, that most ppl claiming that "patchzerg" like Slivko, Votix and SortOf, who are also supposedly worse that most koreans, suddenly started to take games off them.
U see it now, or still more explaination is needed?
On August 20 2012 21:35 Swiipii wrote: I don't think that anyone is denying the fact that Zerg are doing quite well vs Terrans atm . But saying that Zerg is just "A+click trololol sdsdsdsds 1a1a1a1a" and that SortOf/JR/etc.. can be compared to players like DRG or even Stephano is just bullshit .
Whether they are pre-patch Zergs or not they aren't winning anything and i am sure they never will (at the highest level of play).
Looking forward to the next MLG and watch some "real" TvZ .
See, I don't think anyone is saying that every Zerg is just a+click 1a1a1a1 and that SortOf = DRG; what annoys people is that there is very little difference in results between players like SortOf/JR/Vortix who are obviously not anywhere close to being Code S levels in their control and mechanics etc compared to Code S level zergs, at least in ZvT. It's entirely possible that the current ZvT situation is very temporary, but in the meantime it's frustrating watching that kind of play going as far as it did in tournaments like IEM which was 'supposed' to be pretty loaded with talent.
I don't want to say that Vortix or JohnnyRecco or whatever is talentless and bad - but I don't see how can anyone deny that their games in IEM & TSL were awful in every sense of that word. It's obvious that the way the game was patched has a lot to do with viability of the style of play they used, hence the hate on the patches and the 'patchzergs'. It's silly to sit around guessing whether they'd be any good without the queen / infestor patches or not (or if the patches were different), but looking at how they play - in the game as it is now, 'patchzerg' does seem like a pretty fitting name. :p
Did you even watch those games ? ForGG's play at IEM against Vortix was just embarrassing to the Terran race . And you can wonder how did he took 3rd place at Assembly .
Again not saying that those players are not surfing on the patch wave but stop being overdramatic (not pointing at you in particular of course) . Every one kept their mouth shut when Nestea got rolled by Puma and Kas or when Strelok took a game from him or even when Demuslim defeated Nerchio in group stages . Upsets happens . As long as I don't see JR or SortOf taking a game from players like MKP, Taeja, Ryung or even Polt I am cool with it .
And for the record, SuperNova's TvZ is pretty meh . Nestea won twice against him in the last GSL (yeah the same Nestea who struggles A LOT in ZvT and who barely reach a 50% ratio in the match up) and if I remember correctly he complained about his TvZ at IEM Sao Paulo (where he lost 3-1 to Violet) .
NesTea being defeated by PuMa and Kas isn't an upset lol. NesTea is far from being a top zerg, except in GSL settings where he is decent. In live events settings he just isn't at the level of PuMa, Kas or other players. Demuslim defeating Nerchio isn't really an upset either, both are around at the same skill level? JRecco taking 3 games from Keen is the same as him taking games off of MKP, TaeJa or Ryung, it should not ever happen.
Gets in every code S in existence and reigned since the dark ages of zerg. gets called not a top zerg. Yea that ro8 was decent, not good, just decent... Excuse me?
Is the only player to ever win a GSL without dropping a single set and the only one to have ever won 2 GSLs in a row, gets called decent in GSL settings by a random guy on TL.
On August 20 2012 09:29 MasterOfPuppets wrote: People who complain about "patchzergs" are people who have absolutely no idea with regards to who is good in the foreign scene beyond the top 10. "OMG I don't know this guy therefore he's a noob; this noob just beat a player who i know is good, the game must be broken argh"
It's simple. If you want to have an educated opinion on who is good at the moment, you need to follow a lot of starcraft, including the much overlooked daily/weekly cups and smaller invitationals. If you can't be bothered to do that then that's fine, I respect your choice but don't talk about something that you are intentionally uninformed about, it just makes you look ignorant and foolish.
Thank you OP for putting the time and effort into this thread, I agree completely with you. On a semi-related note, this sort of reminds me in a way of Stephano back when he made his breakout, people thought he was a flash in the pan and not a genuinely talented player even though he's had absolute stomps (over top european terrans at the time) dating all the way back to april / may 2011 if I recall correctly.
I'm pretty excited with regards to what the future holds for these players, as well as some others like Ziktomini, JohnnyREcco, Scarlett etc. Always good to have more talent. ^^
On August 20 2012 21:35 Swiipii wrote: I don't think that anyone is denying the fact that Zerg are doing quite well vs Terrans atm . But saying that Zerg is just "A+click trololol sdsdsdsds 1a1a1a1a" and that SortOf/JR/etc.. can be compared to players like DRG or even Stephano is just bullshit .
Whether they are pre-patch Zergs or not they aren't winning anything and i am sure they never will (at the highest level of play).
Looking forward to the next MLG and watch some "real" TvZ .
See, I don't think anyone is saying that every Zerg is just a+click 1a1a1a1 and that SortOf = DRG; what annoys people is that there is very little difference in results between players like SortOf/JR/Vortix who are obviously not anywhere close to being Code S levels in their control and mechanics etc compared to Code S level zergs, at least in ZvT. It's entirely possible that the current ZvT situation is very temporary, but in the meantime it's frustrating watching that kind of play going as far as it did in tournaments like IEM which was 'supposed' to be pretty loaded with talent.
I don't want to say that Vortix or JohnnyRecco or whatever is talentless and bad - but I don't see how can anyone deny that their games in IEM & TSL were awful in every sense of that word. It's obvious that the way the game was patched has a lot to do with viability of the style of play they used, hence the hate on the patches and the 'patchzergs'. It's silly to sit around guessing whether they'd be any good without the queen / infestor patches or not (or if the patches were different), but looking at how they play - in the game as it is now, 'patchzerg' does seem like a pretty fitting name. :p
Did you even watch those games ? ForGG's play at IEM against Vortix was just embarrassing to the Terran race . And you can wonder how did he took 3rd place at Assembly .
Again not saying that those players are not surfing on the patch wave but stop being overdramatic (not pointing at you in particular of course) . Every one kept their mouth shut when Nestea got rolled by Puma and Kas or when Strelok took a game from him or even when Demuslim defeated Nerchio in group stages . Upsets happens . As long as I don't see JR or SortOf taking a game from players like MKP, Taeja, Ryung or even Polt I am cool with it .
And for the record, SuperNova's TvZ is pretty meh . Nestea won twice against him in the last GSL (yeah the same Nestea who struggles A LOT in ZvT and who barely reach a 50% ratio in the match up) and if I remember correctly he complained about his TvZ at IEM Sao Paulo (where he lost 3-1 to Violet) .
NesTea being defeated by PuMa and Kas isn't an upset lol. NesTea is far from being a top zerg, except in GSL settings where he is decent. In live events settings he just isn't at the level of PuMa, Kas or other players. Demuslim defeating Nerchio isn't really an upset either, both are around at the same skill level? JRecco taking 3 games from Keen is the same as him taking games off of MKP, TaeJa or Ryung, it should not ever happen.
Keen equal to Taeja , Ryung or MKP ? At TvZ ? Not really no .
Nestea is Nestea . The only Zerg who won 3 GSL and never droped from code S . If Nestea is far from being a top Zerg then Keen is just a random shit and SuperNova aswell .
I'll stop posting now . I can understand that seing not so good Zerg players make a few wins is bothering (to say the least). But they are not winning anything . And people should acknowledge this fact .
On August 20 2012 21:35 Swiipii wrote: I don't think that anyone is denying the fact that Zerg are doing quite well vs Terrans atm . But saying that Zerg is just "A+click trololol sdsdsdsds 1a1a1a1a" and that SortOf/JR/etc.. can be compared to players like DRG or even Stephano is just bullshit .
Whether they are pre-patch Zergs or not they aren't winning anything and i am sure they never will (at the highest level of play).
Looking forward to the next MLG and watch some "real" TvZ .
See, I don't think anyone is saying that every Zerg is just a+click 1a1a1a1 and that SortOf = DRG; what annoys people is that there is very little difference in results between players like SortOf/JR/Vortix who are obviously not anywhere close to being Code S levels in their control and mechanics etc compared to Code S level zergs, at least in ZvT. It's entirely possible that the current ZvT situation is very temporary, but in the meantime it's frustrating watching that kind of play going as far as it did in tournaments like IEM which was 'supposed' to be pretty loaded with talent.
I don't want to say that Vortix or JohnnyRecco or whatever is talentless and bad - but I don't see how can anyone deny that their games in IEM & TSL were awful in every sense of that word. It's obvious that the way the game was patched has a lot to do with viability of the style of play they used, hence the hate on the patches and the 'patchzergs'. It's silly to sit around guessing whether they'd be any good without the queen / infestor patches or not (or if the patches were different), but looking at how they play - in the game as it is now, 'patchzerg' does seem like a pretty fitting name. :p
Did you even watch those games ? ForGG's play at IEM against Vortix was just embarrassing to the Terran race . And you can wonder how did he took 3rd place at Assembly .
Again not saying that those players are not surfing on the patch wave but stop being overdramatic (not pointing at you in particular of course) . Every one kept their mouth shut when Nestea got rolled by Puma and Kas or when Strelok took a game from him or even when Demuslim defeated Nerchio in group stages . Upsets happens . As long as I don't see JR or SortOf taking a game from players like MKP, Taeja, Ryung or even Polt I am cool with it .
And for the record, SuperNova's TvZ is pretty meh . Nestea won twice against him in the last GSL (yeah the same Nestea who struggles A LOT in ZvT and who barely reach a 50% ratio in the match up) and if I remember correctly he complained about his TvZ at IEM Sao Paulo (where he lost 3-1 to Violet) .
NesTea being defeated by PuMa and Kas isn't an upset lol. NesTea is far from being a top zerg, except in GSL settings where he is decent. In live events settings he just isn't at the level of PuMa, Kas or other players. Demuslim defeating Nerchio isn't really an upset either, both are around at the same skill level? JRecco taking 3 games from Keen is the same as him taking games off of MKP, TaeJa or Ryung, it should not ever happen.
This is wrong and biased "Nestea is far from being a top zerg", i'm already laughing but ok let's go on Then Keen is somehow as good as Taeja or MKP ? Protip : He is just like Nestea, an old player that hasnt made any results since 2011
On August 20 2012 21:35 Swiipii wrote: I don't think that anyone is denying the fact that Zerg are doing quite well vs Terrans atm . But saying that Zerg is just "A+click trololol sdsdsdsds 1a1a1a1a" and that SortOf/JR/etc.. can be compared to players like DRG or even Stephano is just bullshit .
Whether they are pre-patch Zergs or not they aren't winning anything and i am sure they never will (at the highest level of play).
Looking forward to the next MLG and watch some "real" TvZ .
See, I don't think anyone is saying that every Zerg is just a+click 1a1a1a1 and that SortOf = DRG; what annoys people is that there is very little difference in results between players like SortOf/JR/Vortix who are obviously not anywhere close to being Code S levels in their control and mechanics etc compared to Code S level zergs, at least in ZvT. It's entirely possible that the current ZvT situation is very temporary, but in the meantime it's frustrating watching that kind of play going as far as it did in tournaments like IEM which was 'supposed' to be pretty loaded with talent.
I don't want to say that Vortix or JohnnyRecco or whatever is talentless and bad - but I don't see how can anyone deny that their games in IEM & TSL were awful in every sense of that word. It's obvious that the way the game was patched has a lot to do with viability of the style of play they used, hence the hate on the patches and the 'patchzergs'. It's silly to sit around guessing whether they'd be any good without the queen / infestor patches or not (or if the patches were different), but looking at how they play - in the game as it is now, 'patchzerg' does seem like a pretty fitting name. :p
Did you even watch those games ? ForGG's play at IEM against Vortix was just embarrassing to the Terran race . And you can wonder how did he took 3rd place at Assembly .
Again not saying that those players are not surfing on the patch wave but stop being overdramatic (not pointing at you in particular of course) . Every one kept their mouth shut when Nestea got rolled by Puma and Kas or when Strelok took a game from him or even when Demuslim defeated Nerchio in group stages . Upsets happens . As long as I don't see JR or SortOf taking a game from players like MKP, Taeja, Ryung or even Polt I am cool with it .
And for the record, SuperNova's TvZ is pretty meh . Nestea won twice against him in the last GSL (yeah the same Nestea who struggles A LOT in ZvT and who barely reach a 50% ratio in the match up) and if I remember correctly he complained about his TvZ at IEM Sao Paulo (where he lost 3-1 to Violet) .
NesTea being defeated by PuMa and Kas isn't an upset lol. NesTea is far from being a top zerg, except in GSL settings where he is decent. In live events settings he just isn't at the level of PuMa, Kas or other players. Demuslim defeating Nerchio isn't really an upset either, both are around at the same skill level? JRecco taking 3 games from Keen is the same as him taking games off of MKP, TaeJa or Ryung, it should not ever happen.
Gets in every code S in existence and reigned since the dark ages of zerg. gets called not a top zerg. Yea that ro8 was decent, not good, just decent... Excuse me?
Is the only player to ever win a GSL without dropping a single set and the only one to have ever won 2 GSLs in a row, gets called decent in GSL settings by a random guy on TL.
He didn't really won 2 GSLs in a row since Polt won the Super Tournament in between. Winning a GSL without dropping a single set with the weakest road of the history of GSL doesn't tell much about his current skill level. And yeah relative to the GSL players a ro8 result is decent : who remembers the top 8 players of GSL that occured 3 months ago? And yes I said it he does decent in GSL because of the format but in live events he probably won't post the same result as other GSL ro8 players. @Protosnake : Keen isn't as good as TaeJa or MKP that's not the problem LOL. You should not need TaeJa or MKP to crush a new GM scottish zerg player -;-, a 4-3 vs Keen is almost ridiculous.
On August 20 2012 21:35 Swiipii wrote: I don't think that anyone is denying the fact that Zerg are doing quite well vs Terrans atm . But saying that Zerg is just "A+click trololol sdsdsdsds 1a1a1a1a" and that SortOf/JR/etc.. can be compared to players like DRG or even Stephano is just bullshit .
Whether they are pre-patch Zergs or not they aren't winning anything and i am sure they never will (at the highest level of play).
Looking forward to the next MLG and watch some "real" TvZ .
See, I don't think anyone is saying that every Zerg is just a+click 1a1a1a1 and that SortOf = DRG; what annoys people is that there is very little difference in results between players like SortOf/JR/Vortix who are obviously not anywhere close to being Code S levels in their control and mechanics etc compared to Code S level zergs, at least in ZvT. It's entirely possible that the current ZvT situation is very temporary, but in the meantime it's frustrating watching that kind of play going as far as it did in tournaments like IEM which was 'supposed' to be pretty loaded with talent.
I don't want to say that Vortix or JohnnyRecco or whatever is talentless and bad - but I don't see how can anyone deny that their games in IEM & TSL were awful in every sense of that word. It's obvious that the way the game was patched has a lot to do with viability of the style of play they used, hence the hate on the patches and the 'patchzergs'. It's silly to sit around guessing whether they'd be any good without the queen / infestor patches or not (or if the patches were different), but looking at how they play - in the game as it is now, 'patchzerg' does seem like a pretty fitting name. :p
Did you even watch those games ? ForGG's play at IEM against Vortix was just embarrassing to the Terran race . And you can wonder how did he took 3rd place at Assembly .
Again not saying that those players are not surfing on the patch wave but stop being overdramatic (not pointing at you in particular of course) . Every one kept their mouth shut when Nestea got rolled by Puma and Kas or when Strelok took a game from him or even when Demuslim defeated Nerchio in group stages . Upsets happens . As long as I don't see JR or SortOf taking a game from players like MKP, Taeja, Ryung or even Polt I am cool with it .
And for the record, SuperNova's TvZ is pretty meh . Nestea won twice against him in the last GSL (yeah the same Nestea who struggles A LOT in ZvT and who barely reach a 50% ratio in the match up) and if I remember correctly he complained about his TvZ at IEM Sao Paulo (where he lost 3-1 to Violet) .
NesTea being defeated by PuMa and Kas isn't an upset lol. NesTea is far from being a top zerg, except in GSL settings where he is decent. In live events settings he just isn't at the level of PuMa, Kas or other players. Demuslim defeating Nerchio isn't really an upset either, both are around at the same skill level? JRecco taking 3 games from Keen is the same as him taking games off of MKP, TaeJa or Ryung, it should not ever happen.
Gets in every code S in existence and reigned since the dark ages of zerg. gets called not a top zerg. Yea that ro8 was decent, not good, just decent... Excuse me?
Is the only player to ever win a GSL without dropping a single set and the only one to have ever won 2 GSLs in a row, gets called decent in GSL settings by a random guy on TL.
He didn't really won 2 GSLs in a row since Polt won the Super Tournament in between. Winning a GSL without dropping a single set with the weakest road of the history of GSL doesn't tell much about his current skill level. And yeah relative to the GSL players a ro8 result is decent : who remembers the top 8 players of GSL that occured 3 months ago? And yes I said it he does decent in GSL because of the format but in live events he probably won't post the same result as other GSL ro8 players.
Nestea is a strategically strong player, with adequate mechanics behind that. He shines in that kind of environment, but he generally struggles at the grind of LANs, historically and nowadays too. His only really strong LAN experience that I recall from memory is that he did pretty damn well at Ironsquid
Foreign Z players on the other hand, tend to have good catch-all styles that they can whip out every single time. In the GSL these weaknesses can be analysed and specific builds prepared, at tournaments on the fly it's a bit difficult to do. I figure this is also part of the reason people are whining so much about Z at present, that the onus is on P and T players to have to mix it up a lot, while the Zerg largely can continue to do their own thing
On August 21 2012 00:08 AzoriuS wrote: Questioning someones success because u have problems with zergs and give them a title "patchzergs". I thought u will add Nerchio too and ashame yourself. If zerg is so op then tell me wheres Idra idol of teamliquid, wheres TLO, Sheth, Ret ? They all play zergs even prepatch and they are owned by koreans in every matchup.
The most funny thing are players who whine and make some "patchzergs" names arent even in masters league They struggle in diamond, plat,gold or even worse but they talk alot about balance instead of improving theirs macro. Balance is the problem in grandmaster/high master elo. Your only enemy dear whiners is macro.
Citizen kane.gif
Splendid, truly splendid.
Balance patch obviously had huge impact to the TvZ match up, but it is ridiculous to suggest that these eu players are only able to beat korean terran is because of the patch. where as there guys have not had winning.
Now that this statment is made, whole round of 16 will be Zergs at the MLG. You heard it first here folks!
This game become balanced purely after legacy of void this is only path to pure balance u must count with it when u play it at this time train + little patch help can make result ,after legacy it will be only skill , experience and train,play vs players with it.... players who will play during all new patch and hots+lotv will be strongest after and game become more less random .....
On August 20 2012 21:35 Swiipii wrote: I don't think that anyone is denying the fact that Zerg are doing quite well vs Terrans atm . But saying that Zerg is just "A+click trololol sdsdsdsds 1a1a1a1a" and that SortOf/JR/etc.. can be compared to players like DRG or even Stephano is just bullshit .
Whether they are pre-patch Zergs or not they aren't winning anything and i am sure they never will (at the highest level of play).
Looking forward to the next MLG and watch some "real" TvZ .
See, I don't think anyone is saying that every Zerg is just a+click 1a1a1a1 and that SortOf = DRG; what annoys people is that there is very little difference in results between players like SortOf/JR/Vortix who are obviously not anywhere close to being Code S levels in their control and mechanics etc compared to Code S level zergs, at least in ZvT. It's entirely possible that the current ZvT situation is very temporary, but in the meantime it's frustrating watching that kind of play going as far as it did in tournaments like IEM which was 'supposed' to be pretty loaded with talent.
I don't want to say that Vortix or JohnnyRecco or whatever is talentless and bad - but I don't see how can anyone deny that their games in IEM & TSL were awful in every sense of that word. It's obvious that the way the game was patched has a lot to do with viability of the style of play they used, hence the hate on the patches and the 'patchzergs'. It's silly to sit around guessing whether they'd be any good without the queen / infestor patches or not (or if the patches were different), but looking at how they play - in the game as it is now, 'patchzerg' does seem like a pretty fitting name. :p
Did you even watch those games ? ForGG's play at IEM against Vortix was just embarrassing to the Terran race . And you can wonder how did he took 3rd place at Assembly .
Again not saying that those players are not surfing on the patch wave but stop being overdramatic (not pointing at you in particular of course) . Every one kept their mouth shut when Nestea got rolled by Puma and Kas or when Strelok took a game from him or even when Demuslim defeated Nerchio in group stages . Upsets happens . As long as I don't see JR or SortOf taking a game from players like MKP, Taeja, Ryung or even Polt I am cool with it .
And for the record, SuperNova's TvZ is pretty meh . Nestea won twice against him in the last GSL (yeah the same Nestea who struggles A LOT in ZvT and who barely reach a 50% ratio in the match up) and if I remember correctly he complained about his TvZ at IEM Sao Paulo (where he lost 3-1 to Violet) .
NesTea being defeated by PuMa and Kas isn't an upset lol. NesTea is far from being a top zerg, except in GSL settings where he is decent. In live events settings he just isn't at the level of PuMa, Kas or other players. Demuslim defeating Nerchio isn't really an upset either, both are around at the same skill level? JRecco taking 3 games from Keen is the same as him taking games off of MKP, TaeJa or Ryung, it should not ever happen.
Gets in every code S in existence and reigned since the dark ages of zerg. gets called not a top zerg. Yea that ro8 was decent, not good, just decent... Excuse me?
Is the only player to ever win a GSL without dropping a single set and the only one to have ever won 2 GSLs in a row, gets called decent in GSL settings by a random guy on TL.
He didn't really won 2 GSLs in a row since Polt won the Super Tournament in between. Winning a GSL without dropping a single set with the weakest road of the history of GSL doesn't tell much about his current skill level. And yeah relative to the GSL players a ro8 result is decent : who remembers the top 8 players of GSL that occured 3 months ago? And yes I said it he does decent in GSL because of the format but in live events he probably won't post the same result as other GSL ro8 players. @Protosnake : Keen isn't as good as TaeJa or MKP that's not the problem LOL. You should not need TaeJa or MKP to crush a new GM scottish zerg player -;-, a 4-3 vs Keen is almost ridiculous.
Do you have anything against Scottish people? You find them inferior?
@Protosnake : Keen isn't as good as TaeJa or MKP that's not the problem LOL. You should not need TaeJa or MKP to crush a new GM scottish zerg player -;-, a 4-3 vs Keen is almost ridiculous.
How is this ridiculous ?
What kind of results has keen made recently that should made him unbeatable against Jonnyrecco ?
That's one of the problem in your post, you're implying that Nestea isnt a top Zerg, but Yet keen is somehow still a top terran
a change in this game benefits the one who practice a lot at that point, also a buff should help statistics a patch so major such as this queen+overlord buff is of course going to push every zerg out there forward a bit, progamers especially (since they practice so many hours a day to figure out the new things they can change up their builds and plays)
so looking at an active progamers stats before patch and after patch should of course bring better results for them, their race did after all get better than before
the new zergs your talking about were here before, and by no means no-name in the proscene these "no names" might be mediocre to you, vortix sortof slivko etc. but in the european progamer scene they have been up and coming for at least a half year and been considered within the top10 best zergs in eu (about~ not exact) for at least 3 months now, prior to the patch
i dont know the exact dates when forge upgrades and immortals got buffed, but its obvious they helped protosses around the world and were more noticable on hard working protoss players, such as bischu, titan, feast, bling etc.
gsl is more reliable than foreigner events in terms of statistics id say statistics from gsl are more reliable than looking at foreigner events where half of the player pool is very nervous, generally not that good or simply jetlagged. those are factors that scew foreigner lan events results more than you'd think. win rates of gsl season 1, 2 and 3 follows tvz winratio (map score) of 52.8%, 48,7% and 48,8%. i dont know when exactly the patch came between these 3 seasons but it did have less impact than we all thought it would have. when the patch just came i thought id never lose a zvt again, i was wrong
judging up and coming player stats when looking at a patch is not accurate also i think its pretty flawed to look at a single up and coming players results, simply because they generally face harder opponents the stronger they are as players. i for example used to play a ton of weekly cups and was at around 70% winratio for a very long time, then i stopped doing that and almost exclusively played big lan events and online tournaments and dropped to the 60% range
lets not discuss which race is harder to play and i think as some do, talking about balance in terms of which race is harder to play is just pretty retarded. there are things that make my race etc hard that people who arent on my level wouldnt understand what im going through. thats why i generally dont talk about this since i dont know how actually hard protoss is to play at the highest levels. all races have different things which makes it difficult, they dont all have to be the same
final words i have a feeling zerg will get nerfed in the future, rather than the other 2 races. less because of blizzards data and tournament results and rather that almost the entire community seems to be thinking zerg is "OP". i remember this happened just recently but the subject was about tvp and blizzard made a post and you all thought they were stupid and then you stopped talk about it and moved onto zerg. generally the community is right when almost absolute majority thinks the same, but it doesnt always have to be. this patch was so huge that results of this were almost unavoidable but i see it more as a bump in the road and expect the other races to adapt to the patch eventually.
I don't really see any consideration of the players' overall skill level increasing in the same period of time the patch has been out, which is a huge oversight.
It could be argued that Protoss, and Terran (to a more prominent extent) enjoyed advantages in game balance in between patches, but I don't recall anything like this being brought to bear.
In the end, the only test that truly matters it that of time. If you're legit, you're here to stay. If you don't stick around, well, it doesn't mean you were a "patch player" but it certainly will make spectators wonder.
@Protosnake : Keen isn't as good as TaeJa or MKP that's not the problem LOL. You should not need TaeJa or MKP to crush a new GM scottish zerg player -;-, a 4-3 vs Keen is almost ridiculous.
How is this ridiculous ?
What kind of results has keen made recently that should made him unbeatable against Jonnyrecco ?
That's one of the problem in your post, you're implying that Nestea isnt a top Zerg, but Yet keen is somehow still a top terran
if i remember correctly he made Code S at least 1 time this year?!? keen is one of the better terrans, not as good as MVP, MKP or Taeja, but if jonnyrecco would have won that, that would be a huge upset imo!
On August 21 2012 00:08 AzoriuS wrote: Questioning someones success because u have problems with zergs and give them a title "patchzergs". I thought u will add Nerchio too and ashame yourself. If zerg is so op then tell me wheres Idra idol of teamliquid, wheres TLO, Sheth, Ret ? They all play zergs even prepatch and they are owned by koreans in every matchup.
The most funny thing are players who whine and make some "patchzergs" names arent even in masters league They struggle in diamond, plat,gold or even worse but they talk alot about balance instead of improving theirs macro. Balance is the problem in grandmaster/high master elo. Your only enemy dear whiners is macro.
First post i completly agree with, it just makes me laugh when all this platinum and silver players are whining on teamliquid and posting 1000x posts how its impossible to beat zerg. Oh yeah and i forgot how every1 is suposed to loose when playing against korean or he is a patchzerg.
You didn't watch the keen vs jrecco series or you just don't understand what you saw. Keen made lots of mistakes. Any pro level player can beat you if you keep making mistakes no matter how many times you've been to code S.
@Protosnake : Keen isn't as good as TaeJa or MKP that's not the problem LOL. You should not need TaeJa or MKP to crush a new GM scottish zerg player -;-, a 4-3 vs Keen is almost ridiculous.
How is this ridiculous ?
What kind of results has keen made recently that should made him unbeatable against Jonnyrecco ?
That's one of the problem in your post, you're implying that Nestea isnt a top Zerg, but Yet keen is somehow still a top terran
if i remember correctly he made Code S at least 1 time this year?!? keen is one of the better terrans, not as good as MVP, MKP or Taeja, but if jonnyrecco would have won that, that would be a huge upset imo!
He made the Ro16 once this year, nothing spectacular
Also, as pointed out above, people that didnt watch the serie shouldnt comment on it. Keen litteraly threw games against Jonnyrecco, yet he still won the whole thing
On August 21 2012 00:08 AzoriuS wrote: Questioning someones success because u have problems with zergs and give them a title "patchzergs". I thought u will add Nerchio too and ashame yourself. If zerg is so op then tell me wheres Idra idol of teamliquid, wheres TLO, Sheth, Ret ? They all play zergs even prepatch and they are owned by koreans in every matchup.
The most funny thing are players who whine and make some "patchzergs" names arent even in masters league They struggle in diamond, plat,gold or even worse but they talk alot about balance instead of improving theirs macro. Balance is the problem in grandmaster/high master elo. Your only enemy dear whiners is macro.
First post i completly agree with, it just makes me laugh when all this platinum and silver players are whining on teamliquid and posting 1000x posts how its impossible to beat zerg. Oh yeah and i forgot how every1 is suposed to loose when playing against korean or he is a patchzerg.
Ok, but when even the top Terrans feel there's an issue with the matchup we should disregard them too? You can't castigate 'all the silver and platinum' players for having their opinion, and also disregard what top Terrans believe regarding the matchup.
It's great when people reduce the argument to ad hominem attacks on players supposed skill levels.
On August 21 2012 00:49 MorroW wrote: a change in this game benefits the one who practice a lot at that point, also a buff should help statistics a patch so major such as this queen+overlord buff is of course going to push every zerg out there forward a bit, progamers especially (since they practice so many hours a day to figure out the new things they can change up their builds and plays)
so looking at an active progamers stats before patch and after patch should of course bring better results for them, their race did after all get better than before
the new zergs your talking about were here before, and by no means no-name in the proscene these "no names" might be mediocre to you, vortix sortof slivko etc. but in the european progamer scene they have been up and coming for at least a half year and been considered within the top10 best zergs in eu (about~ not exact) for at least 3 months now, prior to the patch
i dont know the exact dates when forge upgrades and immortals got buffed, but its obvious they helped protosses around the world and were more noticable on hard working protoss players, such as bischu, titan, feast, bling etc.
gsl is more reliable than foreigner events in terms of statistics id say statistics from gsl are more reliable than looking at foreigner events where half of the player pool is very nervous, generally not that good or simply jetlagged. those are factors that scew foreigner lan events results more than you'd think. win rates of gsl season 1, 2 and 3 follows tvz winratio (map score) of 52.8%, 48,7% and 48,8%. i dont know when exactly the patch came between these 3 seasons but it did have less impact than we all thought it would have. when the patch just came i thought id never lose a zvt again, i was wrong
judging up and coming player stats when looking at a patch is not accurate also i think its pretty flawed to look at a single up and coming players results, simply because they generally face harder opponents the stronger they are as players. i for example used to play a ton of weekly cups and was at around 70% winratio for a very long time, then i stopped doing that and almost exclusively played big lan events and online tournaments and dropped to the 60% range
lets not discuss which race is harder to play and i think as some do, talking about balance in terms of which race is harder to play is just pretty retarded. there are things that make my race etc hard that people who arent on my level wouldnt understand what im going through. thats why i generally dont talk about this since i dont know how actually hard protoss is to play at the highest levels. all races have different things which makes it difficult, they dont all have to be the same
Why shouldn't we talk about which race is harder to play, especially when it harms the play experience of a significant number of players? When Zerg was considered 'harder to play' (i.e. were extremely underpowered) it wasn't an issue at the top level (GSL,) but was a massive issue everywhere else. Zerg had to outclass their opponents to have a chance at winning, and so, almost no one played Zerg outside of Korea. It's the exact same problem that Terran is having right now. Terran players must train harder than Zerg/Protoss players in order to reach the same level of efficacy. That's just bad.
Not only that, but having large skill gaps between races is just piss poor game design. Zerg shouldn't have a virtually microless army while Terran has an army with many, many units that scale extremely well with micro. It leads to problems like, well, having a foreigner scene that is virtually terran-free.
No offense intended MorroW but it seems like you are defending your race's current advantages, rather than trying to contribute to a discussion on the issues it currently causes in the foreigner scene.
On August 21 2012 00:49 MorroW wrote: a change in this game benefits the one who practice a lot at that point, also a buff should help statistics a patch so major such as this queen+overlord buff is of course going to push every zerg out there forward a bit, progamers especially (since they practice so many hours a day to figure out the new things they can change up their builds and plays)
so looking at an active progamers stats before patch and after patch should of course bring better results for them, their race did after all get better than before
the new zergs your talking about were here before, and by no means no-name in the proscene these "no names" might be mediocre to you, vortix sortof slivko etc. but in the european progamer scene they have been up and coming for at least a half year and been considered within the top10 best zergs in eu (about~ not exact) for at least 3 months now, prior to the patch
i dont know the exact dates when forge upgrades and immortals got buffed, but its obvious they helped protosses around the world and were more noticable on hard working protoss players, such as bischu, titan, feast, bling etc.
gsl is more reliable than foreigner events in terms of statistics id say statistics from gsl are more reliable than looking at foreigner events where half of the player pool is very nervous, generally not that good or simply jetlagged. those are factors that scew foreigner lan events results more than you'd think. win rates of gsl season 1, 2 and 3 follows tvz winratio (map score) of 52.8%, 48,7% and 48,8%. i dont know when exactly the patch came between these 3 seasons but it did have less impact than we all thought it would have. when the patch just came i thought id never lose a zvt again, i was wrong
judging up and coming player stats when looking at a patch is not accurate also i think its pretty flawed to look at a single up and coming players results, simply because they generally face harder opponents the stronger they are as players. i for example used to play a ton of weekly cups and was at around 70% winratio for a very long time, then i stopped doing that and almost exclusively played big lan events and online tournaments and dropped to the 60% range
lets not discuss which race is harder to play and i think as some do, talking about balance in terms of which race is harder to play is just pretty retarded. there are things that make my race etc hard that people who arent on my level wouldnt understand what im going through. thats why i generally dont talk about this since i dont know how actually hard protoss is to play at the highest levels. all races have different things which makes it difficult, they dont all have to be the same
Why shouldn't we talk about which race is harder to play, especially when it harms the play experience of a significant number of players? When Zerg was considered 'harder to play' (i.e. were extremely underpowered) it wasn't an issue at the top level (GSL,) but was a massive issue everywhere else. Zerg had to outclass their opponents to have a chance at winning, and so, almost no one played Zerg outside of Korea. It's the exact same problem that Terran is having right now. Terran players must train harder than Zerg/Protoss players in order to reach the same level of efficacy. That's just bad.
Not only that, but having large skill gaps between races is just piss poor game design. Zerg shouldn't have a virtually microless army while Terran has an army with many, many units that scale extremely well with micro. It leads to problems like, well, having a foreigner scene that is virtually terran-free.
No offense intended MorroW but it seems like you are defending your race's current advantages, rather than trying to contribute to a discussion on the issues it currently causes in the foreigner scene.
like i said i think talking about which race is harder to play (not talking about which is harder to win with) is flawed because i have no understanding how hard protoss could be at top top level because i never was there myself to try it out.
On August 21 2012 00:08 AzoriuS wrote: Questioning someones success because u have problems with zergs and give them a title "patchzergs". I thought u will add Nerchio too and ashame yourself. If zerg is so op then tell me wheres Idra idol of teamliquid, wheres TLO, Sheth, Ret ? They all play zergs even prepatch and they are owned by koreans in every matchup.
The most funny thing are players who whine and make some "patchzergs" names arent even in masters league They struggle in diamond, plat,gold or even worse but they talk alot about balance instead of improving theirs macro. Balance is the problem in grandmaster/high master elo. Your only enemy dear whiners is macro.
First post i completly agree with, it just makes me laugh when all this platinum and silver players are whining on teamliquid and posting 1000x posts how its impossible to beat zerg. Oh yeah and i forgot how every1 is suposed to loose when playing against korean or he is a patchzerg.
Ok, but when even the top Terrans feel there's an issue with the matchup we should disregard them too? You can't castigate 'all the silver and platinum' players for having their opinion, and also disregard what top Terrans believe regarding the matchup.
It's great when people reduce the argument to ad hominem attacks on players supposed skill levels.
Isn't that a bit of an ironic statement when the term 'patch-zerg' is just the latest ad hom attack from you and your swarm of equal minded buddies on these players? This thread wouldn't be here if it was not for all the 'silver and platinum' players' being busy doing just this.
On August 21 2012 00:49 MorroW wrote: a change in this game benefits the one who practice a lot at that point, also a buff should help statistics a patch so major such as this queen+overlord buff is of course going to push every zerg out there forward a bit, progamers especially (since they practice so many hours a day to figure out the new things they can change up their builds and plays)
so looking at an active progamers stats before patch and after patch should of course bring better results for them, their race did after all get better than before
the new zergs your talking about were here before, and by no means no-name in the proscene these "no names" might be mediocre to you, vortix sortof slivko etc. but in the european progamer scene they have been up and coming for at least a half year and been considered within the top10 best zergs in eu (about~ not exact) for at least 3 months now, prior to the patch
i dont know the exact dates when forge upgrades and immortals got buffed, but its obvious they helped protosses around the world and were more noticable on hard working protoss players, such as bischu, titan, feast, bling etc.
gsl is more reliable than foreigner events in terms of statistics id say statistics from gsl are more reliable than looking at foreigner events where half of the player pool is very nervous, generally not that good or simply jetlagged. those are factors that scew foreigner lan events results more than you'd think. win rates of gsl season 1, 2 and 3 follows tvz winratio (map score) of 52.8%, 48,7% and 48,8%. i dont know when exactly the patch came between these 3 seasons but it did have less impact than we all thought it would have. when the patch just came i thought id never lose a zvt again, i was wrong
judging up and coming player stats when looking at a patch is not accurate also i think its pretty flawed to look at a single up and coming players results, simply because they generally face harder opponents the stronger they are as players. i for example used to play a ton of weekly cups and was at around 70% winratio for a very long time, then i stopped doing that and almost exclusively played big lan events and online tournaments and dropped to the 60% range
lets not discuss which race is harder to play and i think as some do, talking about balance in terms of which race is harder to play is just pretty retarded. there are things that make my race etc hard that people who arent on my level wouldnt understand what im going through. thats why i generally dont talk about this since i dont know how actually hard protoss is to play at the highest levels. all races have different things which makes it difficult, they dont all have to be the same
Why shouldn't we talk about which race is harder to play, especially when it harms the play experience of a significant number of players? When Zerg was considered 'harder to play' (i.e. were extremely underpowered) it wasn't an issue at the top level (GSL,) but was a massive issue everywhere else. Zerg had to outclass their opponents to have a chance at winning, and so, almost no one played Zerg outside of Korea. It's the exact same problem that Terran is having right now. Terran players must train harder than Zerg/Protoss players in order to reach the same level of efficacy. That's just bad.
Not only that, but having large skill gaps between races is just piss poor game design. Zerg shouldn't have a virtually microless army while Terran has an army with many, many units that scale extremely well with micro. It leads to problems like, well, having a foreigner scene that is virtually terran-free.
No offense intended MorroW but it seems like you are defending your race's current advantages, rather than trying to contribute to a discussion on the issues it currently causes in the foreigner scene.
like i said i think talking about which race is harder to play (not talking about which is harder to win with) is flawed because i have no understanding how hard protoss could be at top top level because i never was there myself to try it out.
Ah. While I agree that a player of a certain race will not be able to fully understand the play experience of a player of another race, I don't think that's reason enough to set aside discussion on the particular difficulties players of a given race are having.
Certainly it isn't at all productive to say things like: "Lolol, Zerg EZ mode free win can't lose vs. Terran blah blah blah." But I think it is productive for players (particularly top professionals) to say "Well I think TvZ is unfairly difficult for Terran at the moment and not very difficult at all for Zerg, and here's why I think that is the case."
On August 21 2012 00:08 AzoriuS wrote: Questioning someones success because u have problems with zergs and give them a title "patchzergs". I thought u will add Nerchio too and ashame yourself. If zerg is so op then tell me wheres Idra idol of teamliquid, wheres TLO, Sheth, Ret ? They all play zergs even prepatch and they are owned by koreans in every matchup.
The most funny thing are players who whine and make some "patchzergs" names arent even in masters league They struggle in diamond, plat,gold or even worse but they talk alot about balance instead of improving theirs macro. Balance is the problem in grandmaster/high master elo. Your only enemy dear whiners is macro.
First post i completly agree with, it just makes me laugh when all this platinum and silver players are whining on teamliquid and posting 1000x posts how its impossible to beat zerg. Oh yeah and i forgot how every1 is suposed to loose when playing against korean or he is a patchzerg.
Ok, but when even the top Terrans feel there's an issue with the matchup we should disregard them too? You can't castigate 'all the silver and platinum' players for having their opinion, and also disregard what top Terrans believe regarding the matchup.
It's great when people reduce the argument to ad hominem attacks on players supposed skill levels.
Isn't that a bit of an ironic statement when the term 'patch-zerg' is just the latest ad hom attack from you and your swarm of equal minded buddies on these players? This thread wouldn't be here if it was not for all the 'silver and platinum' players' being busy doing just this.
I don't attack players I'm unaware of. I'm of the opinion that a player is unknown until he becomes known and thus, the 'patchzerg' tag is often unfairly applied.
I judge games by the play exhibited. I was watching JRecco's games against Keen and both players were pretty sloppy, I felt Recco more so but that's a bit subjective. However what I did see was the exact same pattern pretty much every game, rush to hivetech and try to defend in the midgame.
It's patently clear that the patch has had a big knockon effect, and people aren't just whining because they're not winning, or because games have been going the way that they personally don't enjoy to watch. Some are whining because they feel the patch that made such play possible went too far, it's not that difficult a concept to accept, even if you disagree with their assessment.
The Queen patch, coupled with the overlord speed buff has become a crutch on which Zerg can rush to hive with. When Donraegu says that he feels it went too far/was unnecessary. This trend towards hive rushes also largely bypasses the midgame and ling/bling/muta compositions that the likes of DRG were able to use more effectively than their Zerg peers. As somebody earlier posted, there's not degrees of difference in a hive tech army controlled by DRG, than there is by nearly any other pro zerg. However, there's a world of difference between Donraegu's ling/bling/muta play than almost any other Zerg.
Some of us don't like this trend, we don't have to shit on other players to express it (i.e the 'patch zerg' trend), but equally it's pretty apparent that it's had an effect. There are intelligent posters here from both sides, but equally there are retards who either think it's some kind of karmic justice that Terran is struggling, or that the patch shouldn't matter/doesn't have an effect.
If there's a lategame composition like BL/Infestor that's extremely potent, relatively easy to use and hard to engage, then it should be difficult to obtain. I and others feel this balance between risk/reward has been somewhat skewed, perhaps a bit too far. Also bear in mind that with hivetech coming out earlier and earlier nowadays, Terran's old counters to that lategame, i.e mass ghosts being mixed in, no longer work.
On August 21 2012 00:49 MorroW wrote: a change in this game benefits the one who practice a lot at that point, also a buff should help statistics a patch so major such as this queen+overlord buff is of course going to push every zerg out there forward a bit, progamers especially (since they practice so many hours a day to figure out the new things they can change up their builds and plays)
so looking at an active progamers stats before patch and after patch should of course bring better results for them, their race did after all get better than before
the new zergs your talking about were here before, and by no means no-name in the proscene these "no names" might be mediocre to you, vortix sortof slivko etc. but in the european progamer scene they have been up and coming for at least a half year and been considered within the top10 best zergs in eu (about~ not exact) for at least 3 months now, prior to the patch
i dont know the exact dates when forge upgrades and immortals got buffed, but its obvious they helped protosses around the world and were more noticable on hard working protoss players, such as bischu, titan, feast, bling etc.
gsl is more reliable than foreigner events in terms of statistics id say statistics from gsl are more reliable than looking at foreigner events where half of the player pool is very nervous, generally not that good or simply jetlagged. those are factors that scew foreigner lan events results more than you'd think. win rates of gsl season 1, 2 and 3 follows tvz winratio (map score) of 52.8%, 48,7% and 48,8%. i dont know when exactly the patch came between these 3 seasons but it did have less impact than we all thought it would have. when the patch just came i thought id never lose a zvt again, i was wrong
judging up and coming player stats when looking at a patch is not accurate also i think its pretty flawed to look at a single up and coming players results, simply because they generally face harder opponents the stronger they are as players. i for example used to play a ton of weekly cups and was at around 70% winratio for a very long time, then i stopped doing that and almost exclusively played big lan events and online tournaments and dropped to the 60% range
lets not discuss which race is harder to play and i think as some do, talking about balance in terms of which race is harder to play is just pretty retarded. there are things that make my race etc hard that people who arent on my level wouldnt understand what im going through. thats why i generally dont talk about this since i dont know how actually hard protoss is to play at the highest levels. all races have different things which makes it difficult, they dont all have to be the same
Why shouldn't we talk about which race is harder to play, especially when it harms the play experience of a significant number of players? When Zerg was considered 'harder to play' (i.e. were extremely underpowered) it wasn't an issue at the top level (GSL,) but was a massive issue everywhere else. Zerg had to outclass their opponents to have a chance at winning, and so, almost no one played Zerg outside of Korea. It's the exact same problem that Terran is having right now. Terran players must train harder than Zerg/Protoss players in order to reach the same level of efficacy. That's just bad.
Not only that, but having large skill gaps between races is just piss poor game design. Zerg shouldn't have a virtually microless army while Terran has an army with many, many units that scale extremely well with micro. It leads to problems like, well, having a foreigner scene that is virtually terran-free.
No offense intended MorroW but it seems like you are defending your race's current advantages, rather than trying to contribute to a discussion on the issues it currently causes in the foreigner scene.
like i said i think talking about which race is harder to play (not talking about which is harder to win with) is flawed because i have no understanding how hard protoss could be at top top level because i never was there myself to try it out.
Ah. While I agree that a player of a certain race will not be able to fully understand the play experience of a player of another race, I don't think that's reason enough to set aside discussion on the particular difficulties players of a given race are having.
Certainly it isn't at all productive to say things like: "Lolol, Zerg EZ mode free win can't lose vs. Terran blah blah blah." But I think it is productive for players (particularly top professionals) to say "Well I think TvZ is unfairly difficult for Terran at the moment and not very difficult at all for Zerg, and here's why I think that is the case."
Exactly, and there have been posts that make reasoned points that are shut down as QQing or balance whining. It's nice that pros like Morrow still reside on these forums and interact on these kind of issues, nice to see.
In terms of the other race point it's pretty salient as well. I play P and T pretty proficiently but I am terrible with Zerg. This isn't because I am bad, or don't have mechanics but because it's just very strange for me to build either drones, or attacking units. With Protoss and Terran it's a case of building economy, teching and popping out units when you have money, with Zerg it just feels instinctively awkward for me to have to decide when to drone or not, sometimes blindly.
On August 21 2012 00:08 AzoriuS wrote: Questioning someones success because u have problems with zergs and give them a title "patchzergs". I thought u will add Nerchio too and ashame yourself. If zerg is so op then tell me wheres Idra idol of teamliquid, wheres TLO, Sheth, Ret ? They all play zergs even prepatch and they are owned by koreans in every matchup.
The most funny thing are players who whine and make some "patchzergs" names arent even in masters league They struggle in diamond, plat,gold or even worse but they talk alot about balance instead of improving theirs macro. Balance is the problem in grandmaster/high master elo. Your only enemy dear whiners is macro.
First post i completly agree with, it just makes me laugh when all this platinum and silver players are whining on teamliquid and posting 1000x posts how its impossible to beat zerg. Oh yeah and i forgot how every1 is suposed to loose when playing against korean or he is a patchzerg.
Ok, but when even the top Terrans feel there's an issue with the matchup we should disregard them too? You can't castigate 'all the silver and platinum' players for having their opinion, and also disregard what top Terrans believe regarding the matchup.
Of course you can, and you should.
The top Terrans have an issue with the matchup because they find the changes difficult to adapt to. A honest progamer will realize this is an issue with his own play and understanding of the game after the patch. A frustrated one will stir up the pot a little, because it costs him nothing to do so.
We've been over this exact same discussions dozens of times for every single race in the last 2 years. I just don't understand how people don't get tired and frustrated by them by now more so than by whatever balance issues they believe exist. =/
On August 21 2012 00:08 AzoriuS wrote: Questioning someones success because u have problems with zergs and give them a title "patchzergs". I thought u will add Nerchio too and ashame yourself. If zerg is so op then tell me wheres Idra idol of teamliquid, wheres TLO, Sheth, Ret ? They all play zergs even prepatch and they are owned by koreans in every matchup.
The most funny thing are players who whine and make some "patchzergs" names arent even in masters league They struggle in diamond, plat,gold or even worse but they talk alot about balance instead of improving theirs macro. Balance is the problem in grandmaster/high master elo. Your only enemy dear whiners is macro.
First post i completly agree with, it just makes me laugh when all this platinum and silver players are whining on teamliquid and posting 1000x posts how its impossible to beat zerg. Oh yeah and i forgot how every1 is suposed to loose when playing against korean or he is a patchzerg.
Ok, but when even the top Terrans feel there's an issue with the matchup we should disregard them too? You can't castigate 'all the silver and platinum' players for having their opinion, and also disregard what top Terrans believe regarding the matchup.
Of course you can, and you should.
The top Terrans have an issue with the matchup because they find the changes difficult to adapt to. A honest progamer will realize this is an issue with his own play and understanding of the game after the patch. A frustrated one will stir up the pot a little, because it costs him nothing to do so.
We've been over this exact same discussions dozens of times for every single race in the last 2 years. I just don't understand how people don't get tired and frustrated by them by now more so than by whatever balance issues they believe exist. =/
It's not necessarily coming purely from a balance point of view. Most would agree that PvZ is largely balanced, but decry the dynamics of the matchup as it stands. Likewise, I don't just blindly agree/disagree but look at the actual arguments presented
This is an old video, and it's Idra being Idra, but I feel it's relevant here
In short, he's saying Zerg need either better scouting information, or an ability to defend better blindly. The Queen/Overlord speed buff pretty much improved both of those, with no real corresponding downsides.
Likewise, when discussing the mothership core, I was one who, despite playing Protoss wasn't exactly happy with it. It appears from a design perspective, with that deathcannon ability it has, to allow blind greedy play and reduce smart reactive aggression.
To go into a hypothetical situation, let's say the Queens required larva, past the amount of hatches you had or something. You would see players have to make a strategic decision when it came to building defensive Queens versus the economic advantage of squeezing out extra drones. This adds an extra strategic dimension, and a bigger risk/reward balance and thus the players who actually know what they're doing gain bigger advantages over players who aren't as talented.
@Protosnake : Keen isn't as good as TaeJa or MKP that's not the problem LOL. You should not need TaeJa or MKP to crush a new GM scottish zerg player -;-, a 4-3 vs Keen is almost ridiculous.
How is this ridiculous ?
What kind of results has keen made recently that should made him unbeatable against Jonnyrecco ?
That's one of the problem in your post, you're implying that Nestea isnt a top Zerg, but Yet keen is somehow still a top terran
if i remember correctly he made Code S at least 1 time this year?!? keen is one of the better terrans, not as good as MVP, MKP or Taeja, but if jonnyrecco would have won that, that would be a huge upset imo!
He made the Ro16 once this year, nothing spectacular
Also, as pointed out above, people that didnt watch the serie shouldnt comment on it. Keen litteraly threw games against Jonnyrecco, yet he still won the whole thing
Round of 16 Code S IS spectacular for a foreigner. Only Jinro, Idra, Huk, an Naniwa have ever achieved that.
On August 21 2012 00:49 MorroW wrote: a change in this game benefits the one who practice a lot at that point, also a buff should help statistics a patch so major such as this queen+overlord buff is of course going to push every zerg out there forward a bit, progamers especially (since they practice so many hours a day to figure out the new things they can change up their builds and plays)
so looking at an active progamers stats before patch and after patch should of course bring better results for them, their race did after all get better than before
the new zergs your talking about were here before, and by no means no-name in the proscene these "no names" might be mediocre to you, vortix sortof slivko etc. but in the european progamer scene they have been up and coming for at least a half year and been considered within the top10 best zergs in eu (about~ not exact) for at least 3 months now, prior to the patch
i dont know the exact dates when forge upgrades and immortals got buffed, but its obvious they helped protosses around the world and were more noticable on hard working protoss players, such as bischu, titan, feast, bling etc.
gsl is more reliable than foreigner events in terms of statistics id say statistics from gsl are more reliable than looking at foreigner events where half of the player pool is very nervous, generally not that good or simply jetlagged. those are factors that scew foreigner lan events results more than you'd think. win rates of gsl season 1, 2 and 3 follows tvz winratio (map score) of 52.8%, 48,7% and 48,8%. i dont know when exactly the patch came between these 3 seasons but it did have less impact than we all thought it would have. when the patch just came i thought id never lose a zvt again, i was wrong
judging up and coming player stats when looking at a patch is not accurate also i think its pretty flawed to look at a single up and coming players results, simply because they generally face harder opponents the stronger they are as players. i for example used to play a ton of weekly cups and was at around 70% winratio for a very long time, then i stopped doing that and almost exclusively played big lan events and online tournaments and dropped to the 60% range
lets not discuss which race is harder to play and i think as some do, talking about balance in terms of which race is harder to play is just pretty retarded. there are things that make my race etc hard that people who arent on my level wouldnt understand what im going through. thats why i generally dont talk about this since i dont know how actually hard protoss is to play at the highest levels. all races have different things which makes it difficult, they dont all have to be the same
final words i have a feeling zerg will get nerfed in the future, rather than the other 2 races. less because of blizzards data and tournament results and rather that almost the entire community seems to be thinking zerg is "OP". i remember this happened just recently but the subject was about tvp and blizzard made a post and you all thought they were stupid and then you stopped talk about it and moved onto zerg. generally the community is right when almost absolute majority thinks the same, but it doesnt always have to be. this patch was so huge that results of this were almost unavoidable but i see it more as a bump in the road and expect the other races to adapt to the patch eventually.
Agree completely, except for the well known part. I don't follow the pro scene enough to be up to date on up and coming players.
Especially the judging of up and coming players part is noteworthy. I was very annoyed with people saying Keen should not lose to johnnyrecco (or how you write it) and his loss is indicative of balance. The whole point of up and coming players is that they're on the rise, so occasionally, an upset is to be expected.
On August 20 2012 23:43 BadgerBadger8264 wrote: You can't just look at win rates, they don't tell the whole story. This is because you're only looking at a select few winrates from televised matches, not at their global win rates (counting qualifiers and open brackets, that are typically not broadcast).
VortiX might have a similar win rate currently to what he had before, but the quality of opponents he's playing against has massively changed because he's suddenly qualifying for big tournaments with big name players instead of only playing in small scale tournaments.
Lets take a look at some tournaments VortiX played pre-patch
Can you honestly say you know most of these players, or even if you do, can you honestly say that these players are world class players? Having a score of 55% win rate against these is not impressive for a professional player.
Now lets take a look at the opponents he's playing AFTER the patch.
The difference between quality of players is insane, he went from barely coming out ahead against semi pro's to doing above average against top tier Koreans and foreigners. "Mysteriously" after the patch, obviously. Even looking at tournament wins this should be obvious. He has won 5 tournaments since patch 1.4.2, that is, he has won 5 tournaments in 2 months. Compared to his previous record of winning about 1 tournament every 2 months, going to winning 5 tournaments in 2 months is quite a substantial difference. Don't let win rates fool you. Instead, look at who they are winning against.
The same basically applies to all of the other patch zergs, however, doing this for just one was enough work as it was. Don't be fooled by win rates, because they do not tell the whole story.
While he wins against way better players, those people are also Zerg, prepatch VortiX lost against people like DIMAGA, bly and syz, while after the patch he wins against people like Golden, darkforce and Revival with ease. While the patch gave him a boost for sure ( obviously, since his race got buffed) he also improved as a player.
just saying, lucifron also improved and was smashing face a few weeks before his brother, this leads me to the conclusion that luficfron and vortix just really know how to get better and practice
On August 21 2012 00:49 MorroW wrote: a change in this game benefits the one who practice a lot at that point, also a buff should help statistics a patch so major such as this queen+overlord buff is of course going to push every zerg out there forward a bit, progamers especially (since they practice so many hours a day to figure out the new things they can change up their builds and plays)
so looking at an active progamers stats before patch and after patch should of course bring better results for them, their race did after all get better than before
the new zergs your talking about were here before, and by no means no-name in the proscene these "no names" might be mediocre to you, vortix sortof slivko etc. but in the european progamer scene they have been up and coming for at least a half year and been considered within the top10 best zergs in eu (about~ not exact) for at least 3 months now, prior to the patch
i dont know the exact dates when forge upgrades and immortals got buffed, but its obvious they helped protosses around the world and were more noticable on hard working protoss players, such as bischu, titan, feast, bling etc.
gsl is more reliable than foreigner events in terms of statistics id say statistics from gsl are more reliable than looking at foreigner events where half of the player pool is very nervous, generally not that good or simply jetlagged. those are factors that scew foreigner lan events results more than you'd think. win rates of gsl season 1, 2 and 3 follows tvz winratio (map score) of 52.8%, 48,7% and 48,8%. i dont know when exactly the patch came between these 3 seasons but it did have less impact than we all thought it would have. when the patch just came i thought id never lose a zvt again, i was wrong
judging up and coming player stats when looking at a patch is not accurate also i think its pretty flawed to look at a single up and coming players results, simply because they generally face harder opponents the stronger they are as players. i for example used to play a ton of weekly cups and was at around 70% winratio for a very long time, then i stopped doing that and almost exclusively played big lan events and online tournaments and dropped to the 60% range
lets not discuss which race is harder to play and i think as some do, talking about balance in terms of which race is harder to play is just pretty retarded. there are things that make my race etc hard that people who arent on my level wouldnt understand what im going through. thats why i generally dont talk about this since i dont know how actually hard protoss is to play at the highest levels. all races have different things which makes it difficult, they dont all have to be the same
Why shouldn't we talk about which race is harder to play, especially when it harms the play experience of a significant number of players? When Zerg was considered 'harder to play' (i.e. were extremely underpowered) it wasn't an issue at the top level (GSL,) but was a massive issue everywhere else. Zerg had to outclass their opponents to have a chance at winning, and so, almost no one played Zerg outside of Korea. It's the exact same problem that Terran is having right now. Terran players must train harder than Zerg/Protoss players in order to reach the same level of efficacy. That's just bad.
Not only that, but having large skill gaps between races is just piss poor game design. Zerg shouldn't have a virtually microless army while Terran has an army with many, many units that scale extremely well with micro. It leads to problems like, well, having a foreigner scene that is virtually terran-free.
No offense intended MorroW but it seems like you are defending your race's current advantages, rather than trying to contribute to a discussion on the issues it currently causes in the foreigner scene.
like i said i think talking about which race is harder to play (not talking about which is harder to win with) is flawed because i have no understanding how hard protoss could be at top top level because i never was there myself to try it out.
Ah. While I agree that a player of a certain race will not be able to fully understand the play experience of a player of another race, I don't think that's reason enough to set aside discussion on the particular difficulties players of a given race are having.
Certainly it isn't at all productive to say things like: "Lolol, Zerg EZ mode free win can't lose vs. Terran blah blah blah." But I think it is productive for players (particularly top professionals) to say "Well I think TvZ is unfairly difficult for Terran at the moment and not very difficult at all for Zerg, and here's why I think that is the case."
Those arguments have been made and countered by professionals of the other races. However, these arguments are all very subjective and situational. Also, professional players are very bias torward their own race and its balance difficulties. The only thing those discussions lead to are threads like these, where people diminish the accomplishments of up and comming players.
Personally, I am beyond tired of the balance whining. It takes away from every other aspect of the game and reduces amazing games to "Well it takes a player like MVP to beat a zerg in this day and age". It makes it hard to get excited about the next big tournament when I know it will be followed up by the community diving headlong into another discussion like this one.
JohnnyREcco also appeared shortly after the patch. But I don'r believe in patch zergs, Ive seen vortiz work hard as well as Slivko and Sortof.
Terrans are generally in the mindset that they have to attack before zerg gets a 2nd base or bewfore they get a third and are obsessed with drop harass and timing attacks, If terran would secure an economic lead (ez pz 3cc mule party) then they would not have trouble on the ladder. We see the pro terran players doing builds that favor economy to harass lately while still balancing the aggressive nature of terran play (e.g. Taeja,Keen or in the case of Kas vs Dimaga.)
On August 21 2012 00:49 MorroW wrote: a change in this game benefits the one who practice a lot at that point, also a buff should help statistics a patch so major such as this queen+overlord buff is of course going to push every zerg out there forward a bit, progamers especially (since they practice so many hours a day to figure out the new things they can change up their builds and plays)
so looking at an active progamers stats before patch and after patch should of course bring better results for them, their race did after all get better than before
the new zergs your talking about were here before, and by no means no-name in the proscene these "no names" might be mediocre to you, vortix sortof slivko etc. but in the european progamer scene they have been up and coming for at least a half year and been considered within the top10 best zergs in eu (about~ not exact) for at least 3 months now, prior to the patch
i dont know the exact dates when forge upgrades and immortals got buffed, but its obvious they helped protosses around the world and were more noticable on hard working protoss players, such as bischu, titan, feast, bling etc.
gsl is more reliable than foreigner events in terms of statistics id say statistics from gsl are more reliable than looking at foreigner events where half of the player pool is very nervous, generally not that good or simply jetlagged. those are factors that scew foreigner lan events results more than you'd think. win rates of gsl season 1, 2 and 3 follows tvz winratio (map score) of 52.8%, 48,7% and 48,8%. i dont know when exactly the patch came between these 3 seasons but it did have less impact than we all thought it would have. when the patch just came i thought id never lose a zvt again, i was wrong
judging up and coming player stats when looking at a patch is not accurate also i think its pretty flawed to look at a single up and coming players results, simply because they generally face harder opponents the stronger they are as players. i for example used to play a ton of weekly cups and was at around 70% winratio for a very long time, then i stopped doing that and almost exclusively played big lan events and online tournaments and dropped to the 60% range
lets not discuss which race is harder to play and i think as some do, talking about balance in terms of which race is harder to play is just pretty retarded. there are things that make my race etc hard that people who arent on my level wouldnt understand what im going through. thats why i generally dont talk about this since i dont know how actually hard protoss is to play at the highest levels. all races have different things which makes it difficult, they dont all have to be the same
Why shouldn't we talk about which race is harder to play, especially when it harms the play experience of a significant number of players? When Zerg was considered 'harder to play' (i.e. were extremely underpowered) it wasn't an issue at the top level (GSL,) but was a massive issue everywhere else. Zerg had to outclass their opponents to have a chance at winning, and so, almost no one played Zerg outside of Korea. It's the exact same problem that Terran is having right now. Terran players must train harder than Zerg/Protoss players in order to reach the same level of efficacy. That's just bad.
Not only that, but having large skill gaps between races is just piss poor game design. Zerg shouldn't have a virtually microless army while Terran has an army with many, many units that scale extremely well with micro. It leads to problems like, well, having a foreigner scene that is virtually terran-free.
No offense intended MorroW but it seems like you are defending your race's current advantages, rather than trying to contribute to a discussion on the issues it currently causes in the foreigner scene.
like i said i think talking about which race is harder to play (not talking about which is harder to win with) is flawed because i have no understanding how hard protoss could be at top top level because i never was there myself to try it out.
Ah. While I agree that a player of a certain race will not be able to fully understand the play experience of a player of another race, I don't think that's reason enough to set aside discussion on the particular difficulties players of a given race are having.
Certainly it isn't at all productive to say things like: "Lolol, Zerg EZ mode free win can't lose vs. Terran blah blah blah." But I think it is productive for players (particularly top professionals) to say "Well I think TvZ is unfairly difficult for Terran at the moment and not very difficult at all for Zerg, and here's why I think that is the case."
Those arguments have been made and countered by professionals of the other races. However, these arguments are all very subjective and situational. Also, professional players are very bias torward their own race and its balance difficulties. The only thing those discussions lead to are threads like these, where people diminish the accomplishments of up and comming players.
Personally, I am beyond tired of the balance whining. It takes away from every other aspect of the game and reduces amazing games to "Well it takes a player like MVP to beat a zerg in this day and age". It makes it hard to get excited about the next big tournament when I know it will be followed up by the community diving headlong into another discussion like this one.
@Protosnake : Keen isn't as good as TaeJa or MKP that's not the problem LOL. You should not need TaeJa or MKP to crush a new GM scottish zerg player -;-, a 4-3 vs Keen is almost ridiculous.
How is this ridiculous ?
What kind of results has keen made recently that should made him unbeatable against Jonnyrecco ?
That's one of the problem in your post, you're implying that Nestea isnt a top Zerg, but Yet keen is somehow still a top terran
if i remember correctly he made Code S at least 1 time this year?!? keen is one of the better terrans, not as good as MVP, MKP or Taeja, but if jonnyrecco would have won that, that would be a huge upset imo!
He made the Ro16 once this year, nothing spectacular
Also, as pointed out above, people that didnt watch the serie shouldnt comment on it. Keen litteraly threw games against Jonnyrecco, yet he still won the whole thing
Round of 16 Code S IS spectacular for a foreigner. Only Jinro, Idra, Huk, an Naniwa have ever achieved that.
Out of the same amount of tries? And didnt jonnyrecco beat Naniwa as well? And Keen played horrindously in that set, did you watch it?
By the way this comparison makes no sense, up and comers are improving players and thus they will keep improving, patch or not. You obviously should compare the results of established pros instead.
On August 21 2012 00:08 AzoriuS wrote: Questioning someones success because u have problems with zergs and give them a title "patchzergs". I thought u will add Nerchio too and ashame yourself. If zerg is so op then tell me wheres Idra idol of teamliquid, wheres TLO, Sheth, Ret ? They all play zergs even prepatch and they are owned by koreans in every matchup.
The most funny thing are players who whine and make some "patchzergs" names arent even in masters league They struggle in diamond, plat,gold or even worse but they talk alot about balance instead of improving theirs macro. Balance is the problem in grandmaster/high master elo. Your only enemy dear whiners is macro.
First post i completly agree with, it just makes me laugh when all this platinum and silver players are whining on teamliquid and posting 1000x posts how its impossible to beat zerg. Oh yeah and i forgot how every1 is suposed to loose when playing against korean or he is a patchzerg.
Ok, but when even the top Terrans feel there's an issue with the matchup we should disregard them too? You can't castigate 'all the silver and platinum' players for having their opinion, and also disregard what top Terrans believe regarding the matchup.
Of course you can, and you should.
The top Terrans have an issue with the matchup because they find the changes difficult to adapt to. A honest progamer will realize this is an issue with his own play and understanding of the game after the patch. A frustrated one will stir up the pot a little, because it costs him nothing to do so.
We've been over this exact same discussions dozens of times for every single race in the last 2 years. I just don't understand how people don't get tired and frustrated by them by now more so than by whatever balance issues they believe exist. =/
It's not necessarily coming purely from a balance point of view. Most would agree that PvZ is largely balanced, but decry the dynamics of the matchup as it stands. Likewise, I don't just blindly agree/disagree but look at the actual arguments presented
I understand what you're saying. I'm a Protoss player myself, and I would gladly see my race changed or straight up nerfed in some ways to increase the level of play, which right now I feel is pretty abhorrent at pro level. I just try to not bring it up or avoid lengthy arguments because I feel they're completely useless and the only thing they accomplish is annoy other people (though at times I cannot help it).
It's not an issue of agreeing and disagreeing, it's an issue of how healthy these discussions are (or aren't). The arguments are shallow and inconclusive, and that isn't necessarily the fault of people discussing them, it's the fault of the subject that is being discussed. Balance is a subject that everybody discusses from a position of ignorance, because it's normally impossible to be aware of all the non-obvious repercussions of any balance tweak.
Your hypothetical Queen change might make sense in the scope that you presented it in, but that is a very limited scope. You cannot possibly imagine how it will interact with every strategic element in the game, let alone the future developments designed specifically to exploit that change, and least of all the breadth of possible Zerg responses to counter such strategies (and responses to those responses, and so forth). Three months from now, you could have a horde of Zergs backed up by every prominent progamer screaming for you to change it back because they don't know how to deal with the builds that arise to exploit it.
So in essence, even though you have some reasoning behind it, the reasoning doesn't go deep enough and you'd be making that change on a hunch. This is true of any change (or proposed / argued change). The only right thing to do is that, unless the game is broken to the point of being completely unplayable for one race, not to touch balance and design with a barge pole.
On August 21 2012 01:41 Wombat_NI wrote: To go into a hypothetical situation, let's say the Queens required larva, past the amount of hatches you had or something. You would see players have to make a strategic decision when it came to building defensive Queens versus the economic advantage of squeezing out extra drones. This adds an extra strategic dimension, and a bigger risk/reward balance and thus the players who actually know what they're doing gain bigger advantages over players who aren't as talented.
Two Queens costs 300 minerals + 4 supply, which is ~350 minerals and half a larva. A hatchery costs 350 minerals and a whole larva, counting the price of the drone. So, you could cut two defensive queens for a macro hatchery, allowing additional production at the expense of short-term defense (and possibly creep spread). Similarly, if you use a defensive Roach Warren, you could cut a Queen and delay that Warren for a macro hatch.
There are definitely ways to be greedy. (Even something as simple as dumping your Queen mana into more tumors, instead of holding some back for healing, trades short-term safety for longer-term benefit.)
On August 21 2012 00:49 MorroW wrote: a change in this game benefits the one who practice a lot at that point, also a buff should help statistics a patch so major such as this queen+overlord buff is of course going to push every zerg out there forward a bit, progamers especially (since they practice so many hours a day to figure out the new things they can change up their builds and plays)
so looking at an active progamers stats before patch and after patch should of course bring better results for them, their race did after all get better than before
the new zergs your talking about were here before, and by no means no-name in the proscene these "no names" might be mediocre to you, vortix sortof slivko etc. but in the european progamer scene they have been up and coming for at least a half year and been considered within the top10 best zergs in eu (about~ not exact) for at least 3 months now, prior to the patch
i dont know the exact dates when forge upgrades and immortals got buffed, but its obvious they helped protosses around the world and were more noticable on hard working protoss players, such as bischu, titan, feast, bling etc.
gsl is more reliable than foreigner events in terms of statistics id say statistics from gsl are more reliable than looking at foreigner events where half of the player pool is very nervous, generally not that good or simply jetlagged. those are factors that scew foreigner lan events results more than you'd think. win rates of gsl season 1, 2 and 3 follows tvz winratio (map score) of 52.8%, 48,7% and 48,8%. i dont know when exactly the patch came between these 3 seasons but it did have less impact than we all thought it would have. when the patch just came i thought id never lose a zvt again, i was wrong
judging up and coming player stats when looking at a patch is not accurate also i think its pretty flawed to look at a single up and coming players results, simply because they generally face harder opponents the stronger they are as players. i for example used to play a ton of weekly cups and was at around 70% winratio for a very long time, then i stopped doing that and almost exclusively played big lan events and online tournaments and dropped to the 60% range
lets not discuss which race is harder to play and i think as some do, talking about balance in terms of which race is harder to play is just pretty retarded. there are things that make my race etc hard that people who arent on my level wouldnt understand what im going through. thats why i generally dont talk about this since i dont know how actually hard protoss is to play at the highest levels. all races have different things which makes it difficult, they dont all have to be the same
Why shouldn't we talk about which race is harder to play, especially when it harms the play experience of a significant number of players? When Zerg was considered 'harder to play' (i.e. were extremely underpowered) it wasn't an issue at the top level (GSL,) but was a massive issue everywhere else. Zerg had to outclass their opponents to have a chance at winning, and so, almost no one played Zerg outside of Korea. It's the exact same problem that Terran is having right now. Terran players must train harder than Zerg/Protoss players in order to reach the same level of efficacy. That's just bad.
Not only that, but having large skill gaps between races is just piss poor game design. Zerg shouldn't have a virtually microless army while Terran has an army with many, many units that scale extremely well with micro. It leads to problems like, well, having a foreigner scene that is virtually terran-free.
No offense intended MorroW but it seems like you are defending your race's current advantages, rather than trying to contribute to a discussion on the issues it currently causes in the foreigner scene.
Defend his race's advantages, as in wanting Terran to be weak so he can maul face in the TvZ match up he plays?
@Protosnake : Keen isn't as good as TaeJa or MKP that's not the problem LOL. You should not need TaeJa or MKP to crush a new GM scottish zerg player -;-, a 4-3 vs Keen is almost ridiculous.
How is this ridiculous ?
What kind of results has keen made recently that should made him unbeatable against Jonnyrecco ?
That's one of the problem in your post, you're implying that Nestea isnt a top Zerg, but Yet keen is somehow still a top terran
if i remember correctly he made Code S at least 1 time this year?!? keen is one of the better terrans, not as good as MVP, MKP or Taeja, but if jonnyrecco would have won that, that would be a huge upset imo!
He made the Ro16 once this year, nothing spectacular
Also, as pointed out above, people that didnt watch the serie shouldnt comment on it. Keen litteraly threw games against Jonnyrecco, yet he still won the whole thing
Round of 16 Code S IS spectacular for a foreigner. Only Jinro, Idra, Huk, an Naniwa have ever achieved that.
Out of the same amount of tries? And didnt jonnyrecco beat Naniwa as well? And Keen played horrindously in that set, did you watch it?
By the way this comparison makes no sense, up and comers are improving players and thus they will keep improving, patch or not. You obviously should compare the results of established pros instead.
Jonnyrecco didn't play spectacular by any stretch of the imagination either...
On August 21 2012 02:22 Noocta wrote: Most zerg, even the better one play very far from the skill ceilling anyway. They all really need to work on army control.
They need to start controlling their army in the first place. Zergs army control at ESL was just awful.
@Protosnake : Keen isn't as good as TaeJa or MKP that's not the problem LOL. You should not need TaeJa or MKP to crush a new GM scottish zerg player -;-, a 4-3 vs Keen is almost ridiculous.
How is this ridiculous ?
What kind of results has keen made recently that should made him unbeatable against Jonnyrecco ?
That's one of the problem in your post, you're implying that Nestea isnt a top Zerg, but Yet keen is somehow still a top terran
if i remember correctly he made Code S at least 1 time this year?!? keen is one of the better terrans, not as good as MVP, MKP or Taeja, but if jonnyrecco would have won that, that would be a huge upset imo!
He made the Ro16 once this year, nothing spectacular
Also, as pointed out above, people that didnt watch the serie shouldnt comment on it. Keen litteraly threw games against Jonnyrecco, yet he still won the whole thing
Round of 16 Code S IS spectacular for a foreigner. Only Jinro, Idra, Huk, an Naniwa have ever achieved that.
Out of the same amount of tries? And didnt jonnyrecco beat Naniwa as well? And Keen played horrindously in that set, did you watch it?
By the way this comparison makes no sense, up and comers are improving players and thus they will keep improving, patch or not. You obviously should compare the results of established pros instead.
Jonnyrecco didn't play spectacular by any stretch of the imagination either...
You don't need to play spectacular you just need to play solid and good. If they make the mistakes and you don't you'll be in a good position
people need to get over that jonny beat naniwa, everyone know or should know jonny best mu is vs p and naniwa worth mu is z and also jonny isn't top5 gm for no reason, he was almost gm with terran before he swaped to z. so i wouldnt jump to any forgone conclusion without really watching and seeing his play before down-writing as a noob.
The question is a bit odd because there is obviously no binary between whether someone is a 'patch zerg' or not. Vortix, Slivko and JonnyREcco are obviously immensely talented players who are up and coming, but the patch has definitely helped them on their way. The same could be said to be true for someone like Symbol who, although he is almost unarguably in the top 2 of zergs, would probably have had somewhat less of a breakthrough without the patch. If a player improves exponentially as his race gets buffed, then both factors are obviously important in determining his level of success.
I would tend to agree that ZvT seems easier for the zerg at this point, but I would also strongly argue that Europe and the foreign scene in general has a lot stronger zerg players than they do terrans, which also contributes to why you don't see Korean zergs lose to foreigner terrans very often.
On August 21 2012 00:08 AzoriuS wrote: Questioning someones success because u have problems with zergs and give them a title "patchzergs". I thought u will add Nerchio too and ashame yourself. If zerg is so op then tell me wheres Idra idol of teamliquid, wheres TLO, Sheth, Ret ? They all play zergs even prepatch and they are owned by koreans in every matchup.
The most funny thing are players who whine and make some "patchzergs" names arent even in masters league They struggle in diamond, plat,gold or even worse but they talk alot about balance instead of improving theirs macro. Balance is the problem in grandmaster/high master elo. Your only enemy dear whiners is macro.
First post i completly agree with, it just makes me laugh when all this platinum and silver players are whining on teamliquid and posting 1000x posts how its impossible to beat zerg. Oh yeah and i forgot how every1 is suposed to loose when playing against korean or he is a patchzerg.
Ok, but when even the top Terrans feel there's an issue with the matchup we should disregard them too? You can't castigate 'all the silver and platinum' players for having their opinion, and also disregard what top Terrans believe regarding the matchup.
Of course you can, and you should.
The top Terrans have an issue with the matchup because they find the changes difficult to adapt to. A honest progamer will realize this is an issue with his own play and understanding of the game after the patch. A frustrated one will stir up the pot a little, because it costs him nothing to do so.
We've been over this exact same discussions dozens of times for every single race in the last 2 years. I just don't understand how people don't get tired and frustrated by them by now more so than by whatever balance issues they believe exist. =/
It's not necessarily coming purely from a balance point of view. Most would agree that PvZ is largely balanced, but decry the dynamics of the matchup as it stands. Likewise, I don't just blindly agree/disagree but look at the actual arguments presented
I understand what you're saying. I'm a Protoss player myself, and I would gladly see my race changed or straight up nerfed in some ways to increase the level of play, which right now I feel is pretty abhorrent at pro level. I just try to not bring it up or avoid lengthy arguments because I feel they're completely useless and the only thing they accomplish is annoy other people (though at times I cannot help it).
It's not an issue of agreeing and disagreeing, it's an issue of how healthy these discussions are (or aren't). The arguments are shallow and inconclusive, and that isn't necessarily the fault of people discussing them, it's the fault of the subject that is being discussed. Balance is a subject that everybody discusses from a position of ignorance, because it's normally impossible to be aware of all the non-obvious repercussions of any balance tweak.
Your hypothetical Queen change might make sense in the scope that you presented it in, but that is a very limited scope. You cannot possibly imagine how it will interact with every strategic element in the game, let alone the future developments designed specifically to exploit that change, and least of all the breadth of possible Zerg responses to counter such strategies (and responses to those responses, and so forth). Three months from now, you could have a horde of Zergs backed up by every prominent progamer screaming for you to change it back because they don't know how to deal with the builds that arise to exploit it.
So in essence, even though you have some reasoning behind it, the reasoning doesn't go deep enough and you'd be making that change on a hunch. This is true of any change (or proposed / argued change). The only right thing to do is that, unless the game is broken to the point of being completely unplayable for one race, not to touch balance and design with a barge pole.
We'll see how the game develops, I was more reacting to the characterisation of all anti-patch folks being balance QQers or biased in some other way against Zergs. Likewise anybody suggesting certain design changes get accused of being BW fanboys. I feel the game of Starcraft 2 has the potential to be better both as a competitive game and as a spectacle, it's not terrible as it is by any means otherwise I wouldn't play or watch it, but if people feel it could be better there's nothing wrong with expressing that view.
As reversion or other changes don't appear forthcoming we'll have to see how the trends in the game develop, should be interesting for sure. Likewise I feel its unfair to bash players who are just starting to post results, it's a bit distasteful to me but it seems to be the new thing on TL
@Protosnake : Keen isn't as good as TaeJa or MKP that's not the problem LOL. You should not need TaeJa or MKP to crush a new GM scottish zerg player -;-, a 4-3 vs Keen is almost ridiculous.
How is this ridiculous ?
What kind of results has keen made recently that should made him unbeatable against Jonnyrecco ?
That's one of the problem in your post, you're implying that Nestea isnt a top Zerg, but Yet keen is somehow still a top terran
if i remember correctly he made Code S at least 1 time this year?!? keen is one of the better terrans, not as good as MVP, MKP or Taeja, but if jonnyrecco would have won that, that would be a huge upset imo!
He made the Ro16 once this year, nothing spectacular
Also, as pointed out above, people that didnt watch the serie shouldnt comment on it. Keen litteraly threw games against Jonnyrecco, yet he still won the whole thing
Round of 16 Code S IS spectacular for a foreigner. Only Jinro, Idra, Huk, an Naniwa have ever achieved that.
Out of the same amount of tries?
Jinro make round of 16 3 times. He tried in 15 seasons. Idra made it twice. Tried in 5 seasons. Huk made it twice. Tried 5 seasons. Naniwa made it twice, tried 3 seasons.
I don't know how much the patch changed, objectively. What I do know, is that Zerg players in general do not impress me at all with their play, and these up and comers embody this better than anyone else. Sorry, but there's almost nothing impressive about the way they play, sending their 100+ supply armies to catch a single drop, losing half their main to 8 marines during a battle, constantly a-moving their infestors into opposing armies, and still managing to have 10+ broordlords vortexed even though spreading those out is the only thing needed to win with that army. They don't seem particularly clever with their unit compositions and tactics (like Stephano is) either. Frankly, it's hard for me to quantify what they're actually good at. Scouting and reacting to what they see, I guess?
I wouldn't mind if they were tearing up tournaments with amazing play. But they're just kind of mediocre. Supernova looked way better than Vortix during their series, and still lost. I play Protoss (and PvT is my worst matchup, no less), so I should be relatively impartial when watching TvZ - and it always seems like the Terran has to work really hard and do all kinds of difficult stuff, while the Zerg randomly herpderps around and then a-moves to victory. It's quite painful to watch.
@Protosnake : Keen isn't as good as TaeJa or MKP that's not the problem LOL. You should not need TaeJa or MKP to crush a new GM scottish zerg player -;-, a 4-3 vs Keen is almost ridiculous.
How is this ridiculous ?
What kind of results has keen made recently that should made him unbeatable against Jonnyrecco ?
That's one of the problem in your post, you're implying that Nestea isnt a top Zerg, but Yet keen is somehow still a top terran
if i remember correctly he made Code S at least 1 time this year?!? keen is one of the better terrans, not as good as MVP, MKP or Taeja, but if jonnyrecco would have won that, that would be a huge upset imo!
He made the Ro16 once this year, nothing spectacular
Also, as pointed out above, people that didnt watch the serie shouldnt comment on it. Keen litteraly threw games against Jonnyrecco, yet he still won the whole thing
Round of 16 Code S IS spectacular for a foreigner. Only Jinro, Idra, Huk, an Naniwa have ever achieved that.
Out of the same amount of tries?
Jinro make round of 16 3 times. He tried in 15 seasons. Idra made it twice. Tried in 5 seasons. Huk made it twice. Tried 5 seasons. Naniwa made it twice, tried 3 seasons.
Remember the 0-6 from Naniwa before he starts doing well ? A lot of foreigner got seeded though, like Naniwa or Idra, they didn't need to run through code B and code A.
@Protosnake : Keen isn't as good as TaeJa or MKP that's not the problem LOL. You should not need TaeJa or MKP to crush a new GM scottish zerg player -;-, a 4-3 vs Keen is almost ridiculous.
How is this ridiculous ?
What kind of results has keen made recently that should made him unbeatable against Jonnyrecco ?
That's one of the problem in your post, you're implying that Nestea isnt a top Zerg, but Yet keen is somehow still a top terran
if i remember correctly he made Code S at least 1 time this year?!? keen is one of the better terrans, not as good as MVP, MKP or Taeja, but if jonnyrecco would have won that, that would be a huge upset imo!
He made the Ro16 once this year, nothing spectacular
Also, as pointed out above, people that didnt watch the serie shouldnt comment on it. Keen litteraly threw games against Jonnyrecco, yet he still won the whole thing
Round of 16 Code S IS spectacular for a foreigner. Only Jinro, Idra, Huk, an Naniwa have ever achieved that.
Out of the same amount of tries?
Jinro make round of 16 3 times. He tried in 15 seasons. Idra made it twice. Tried in 5 seasons. Huk made it twice. Tried 5 seasons. Naniwa made it twice, tried 3 seasons.
Remember the 0-6 from Naniwa before he starts doing well ? A lot of foreigner got seeded though, like Naniwa or Idra, they didn't need to run through code B and code A.
Pretty sure idra never got seeded in the seasons he made it
On August 21 2012 00:08 AzoriuS wrote: Questioning someones success because u have problems with zergs and give them a title "patchzergs". I thought u will add Nerchio too and ashame yourself. If zerg is so op then tell me wheres Idra idol of teamliquid, wheres TLO, Sheth, Ret ? They all play zergs even prepatch and they are owned by koreans in every matchup.
The most funny thing are players who whine and make some "patchzergs" names arent even in masters league They struggle in diamond, plat,gold or even worse but they talk alot about balance instead of improving theirs macro. Balance is the problem in grandmaster/high master elo. Your only enemy dear whiners is macro.
First post i completly agree with, it just makes me laugh when all this platinum and silver players are whining on teamliquid and posting 1000x posts how its impossible to beat zerg. Oh yeah and i forgot how every1 is suposed to loose when playing against korean or he is a patchzerg.
Ok, but when even the top Terrans feel there's an issue with the matchup we should disregard them too? You can't castigate 'all the silver and platinum' players for having their opinion, and also disregard what top Terrans believe regarding the matchup.
It's great when people reduce the argument to ad hominem attacks on players supposed skill levels.
I didnt notice that majority of top terran are complaining(they kind of cant, looking at torunament results etc. or every1 would laugh at them) and beside that i was targeting with my post majority of this forum. Its not top terrans that post on every page "omfggg patch zergs blabla imba", and thats how live report threads of every tournament looks like at the moment.
@Protosnake : Keen isn't as good as TaeJa or MKP that's not the problem LOL. You should not need TaeJa or MKP to crush a new GM scottish zerg player -;-, a 4-3 vs Keen is almost ridiculous.
How is this ridiculous ?
What kind of results has keen made recently that should made him unbeatable against Jonnyrecco ?
That's one of the problem in your post, you're implying that Nestea isnt a top Zerg, but Yet keen is somehow still a top terran
if i remember correctly he made Code S at least 1 time this year?!? keen is one of the better terrans, not as good as MVP, MKP or Taeja, but if jonnyrecco would have won that, that would be a huge upset imo!
He made the Ro16 once this year, nothing spectacular
Also, as pointed out above, people that didnt watch the serie shouldnt comment on it. Keen litteraly threw games against Jonnyrecco, yet he still won the whole thing
Round of 16 Code S IS spectacular for a foreigner. Only Jinro, Idra, Huk, an Naniwa have ever achieved that.
Out of the same amount of tries?
Jinro make round of 16 3 times. He tried in 15 seasons. Idra made it twice. Tried in 5 seasons. Huk made it twice. Tried 5 seasons. Naniwa made it twice, tried 3 seasons.
Remember the 0-6 from Naniwa before he starts doing well ? A lot of foreigner got seeded though, like Naniwa or Idra, they didn't need to run through code B and code A.
Pretty sure idra never got seeded in the seasons he made it
Idra was only seeded when he returned to Korea. He qualified for all of the seasons where he made it to the round of 16 until he left Korea.
On August 21 2012 00:08 AzoriuS wrote: Questioning someones success because u have problems with zergs and give them a title "patchzergs". I thought u will add Nerchio too and ashame yourself. If zerg is so op then tell me wheres Idra idol of teamliquid, wheres TLO, Sheth, Ret ? They all play zergs even prepatch and they are owned by koreans in every matchup.
The most funny thing are players who whine and make some "patchzergs" names arent even in masters league They struggle in diamond, plat,gold or even worse but they talk alot about balance instead of improving theirs macro. Balance is the problem in grandmaster/high master elo. Your only enemy dear whiners is macro.
First post i completly agree with, it just makes me laugh when all this platinum and silver players are whining on teamliquid and posting 1000x posts how its impossible to beat zerg. Oh yeah and i forgot how every1 is suposed to loose when playing against korean or he is a patchzerg.
Ok, but when even the top Terrans feel there's an issue with the matchup we should disregard them too? You can't castigate 'all the silver and platinum' players for having their opinion, and also disregard what top Terrans believe regarding the matchup.
It's great when people reduce the argument to ad hominem attacks on players supposed skill levels.
I didnt notice that majority of top terran are complaining(they kind of cant, looking at torunament results etc. or every1 would laugh at them) and beside that i was targeting with my post majority of this forum. Its not top terrans that post on every page "omfggg patch zergs blabla imba", and thats how live report threads of every tournament looks like at the moment.
This is true. The only complaints you see from professional terrans are outbursts of frustration on twitter right after a match saying “Zerg IMBA”. Most of them say that the match up is hard and discuss the holes they see in the current builds. But at the end of the day, I have not seen a single terran that is worth talking about complain the match up is totally broken.
After all, while we are all doing this, MVP is practicing.
Axiom: If the last balance update in truth is the reason these zergs made it to the top, one would assume high winrates in especially TvZ and possibly PvZ (some would argue that the overlord change made it easier for zerg to be greedy in this matchup as well) while their ZvZ winrates dropped off.
Why? Well we can safely assume that the balance in ZvZ was not affected by this or any previous patch, and while getting further in tournaments, they will now face the better pre-patch zergs. If these zergs in truth got to where they are because of the patch, they should lose more of these matches.
How does your theory respond to the claim: "Post patch ZvZ win rates may not drop off since they could be defeating other patchzergs."?
On August 20 2012 09:20 grush57 wrote: Come on man u come up with this new fancy term and theory and then u disprove it in the same post.
User was temp banned for this post.
the phrase has been heavily used in the wc3 community, yea the wc3 community was/is retarded
thanks for the useless post, you are retarded.
its kinda obvious that ZvT winrate should increase for the zerg due to the buff. its interesting that ZvP dropped possibly because increased preparation for zerg players from protoss. its hard to argue that the patch zerg phenomenon would lead to lower zerg winrates for these guys since they seem to be the best euro zergs anyways. technically their winrate should stay about the same. and if there is no phenomeon, their ZvZ winrate should go up slightly to show that they are indeed improving.
On August 21 2012 03:14 Thurken wrote: The results in high level korean tournaments are really different than that, showing that a race is not imba at the moment, but more a metagame.
I dont think its about metagame, in my opinion most of this "terrans are doing fine in korea and bad outside" has to do with game design. Terran more micro intensive and requires more skill on high level then other races so only very top of terrans will do well. I dont think there is a patch that can fix it, we need to wait for add ons and hope that blizzard give terrans some less micro intesive units so weaker terran can do better.
On August 21 2012 03:14 Thurken wrote: The results in high level korean tournaments are really different than that, showing that a race is not imba at the moment, but more a metagame.
I dont think its about metagame, in my opinion most of this "terrans are doing fine in korea and bad outside" has to do with game design. Terran more micro intensive and requires more skill on high level then other races so only very top of terrans will do well. I dont think there is a patch that can fix it, we need to wait for add ons and hope that blizzard give terrans some less micro intesive units so weaker terran can do better.
People really need to stop asking Blizzard to lower the skill ceiling of terran. The other 2 races should rather be made as micro intesive, that way the better player would win more often than not. Right now I feel TvT and ZvZ(after the queen buff) are really the only 2 MUs where the better player wins almost always.
On August 21 2012 03:14 Thurken wrote: I dont think its about metagame, in my opinion most of this "terrans are doing fine in korea and bad outside" has to do with game design. Terran more micro intensive and requires more skill on high level then other races so only very top of terrans will do well. I dont think there is a patch that can fix it, we need to wait for add ons and hope that blizzard give terrans some less micro intesive units so weaker terran can do better.
People really need to stop asking Blizzard to lower the skill ceiling of terran. The other 2 races should rather be made as micro intesive, that way the better player would win more often than not.
Agreed. But that would require a lot of effort on blizzard's part (and by a lot, i mean massive changes). So i guess we already know what to expect.
On August 21 2012 03:14 Thurken wrote: The results in high level korean tournaments are really different than that, showing that a race is not imba at the moment, but more a metagame.
I dont think its about metagame, in my opinion most of this "terrans are doing fine in korea and bad outside" has to do with game design. Terran more micro intensive and requires more skill on high level then other races so only very top of terrans will do well. I dont think there is a patch that can fix it, we need to wait for add ons and hope that blizzard give terrans some less micro intesive units so weaker terran can do better.
People really need to stop asking Blizzard to lower the skill ceiling of terran. The other 2 races should rather be made as micro intesive, that way the better player would win more often than not. Right now I feel TvT and ZvZ(after the queen buff) are really the only 2 MUs where the better player wins almost always.
Yea and looking at HotS new untis thats also blizzards idea, warhound + tank hellions are a bit more a-movie and zerg gets viper(caster = micro intensive) + siege unit (positioning), protoss is getting harassment which requires some mico. Not sure how it will work out but at least they are aiming in good direction ^^.
I don't think this definitively proves anything, but it certainly is a good compilation of data. Obviously, Zergs are going to do better after a patch that buffs them, that is given. I don't think the patch took someone from trash to top-tier, though.
On August 21 2012 03:46 NaEjeOn88 wrote: After the patch i switched to zerg cause its so much easier to play with lol. Patch Zergs do exist, good write up!!
On August 21 2012 03:14 Thurken wrote: The results in high level korean tournaments are really different than that, showing that a race is not imba at the moment, but more a metagame.
I dont think its about metagame, in my opinion most of this "terrans are doing fine in korea and bad outside" has to do with game design. Terran more micro intensive and requires more skill on high level then other races so only very top of terrans will do well. I dont think there is a patch that can fix it, we need to wait for add ons and hope that blizzard give terrans some less micro intesive units so weaker terran can do better.
People really need to stop asking Blizzard to lower the skill ceiling of terran. The other 2 races should rather be made as micro intesive, that way the better player would win more often than not. Right now I feel TvT and ZvZ(after the queen buff) are really the only 2 MUs where the better player wins almost always.
On August 21 2012 03:14 Thurken wrote: The results in high level korean tournaments are really different than that, showing that a race is not imba at the moment, but more a metagame.
I dont think its about metagame, in my opinion most of this "terrans are doing fine in korea and bad outside" has to do with game design. Terran more micro intensive and requires more skill on high level then other races so only very top of terrans will do well. I dont think there is a patch that can fix it, we need to wait for add ons and hope that blizzard give terrans some less micro intesive units so weaker terran can do better.
People really need to stop asking Blizzard to lower the skill ceiling of terran. The other 2 races should rather be made as micro intesive, that way the better player would win more often than not. Right now I feel TvT and ZvZ(after the queen buff) are really the only 2 MUs where the better player wins almost always.
Terran is the most micro intensive race ?
Yes, because you can't trade efficiently if you don't micro hard, like actually zerg and to a lesser extent protoss can.
On August 21 2012 03:14 Thurken wrote: The results in high level korean tournaments are really different than that, showing that a race is not imba at the moment, but more a metagame.
I dont think its about metagame, in my opinion most of this "terrans are doing fine in korea and bad outside" has to do with game design. Terran more micro intensive and requires more skill on high level then other races so only very top of terrans will do well. I dont think there is a patch that can fix it, we need to wait for add ons and hope that blizzard give terrans some less micro intesive units so weaker terran can do better.
People really need to stop asking Blizzard to lower the skill ceiling of terran. The other 2 races should rather be made as micro intesive, that way the better player would win more often than not. Right now I feel TvT and ZvZ(after the queen buff) are really the only 2 MUs where the better player wins almost always.
Terran is the most micro intensive race ?
Terran mainly involves relatively more movement based micro (Marines, Marauders, Medivac, Vikings, setting up right rallies, dropping, Hellions/Banshees move-kite). When playing mech, it becomes more positioning based though.
Protoss involves relatively more casting based micro (Sentry FF/GS, Stalker Blink, HT storm/feedbacks, warping in reinforcements) It does feel easier for me, which is why I used to main protoss.
Zerg involves relatively more positioning/map awareness micro (Keeping them Ovies pooping/floating, being active with mutas without them flying into turrets, positioning Zerglings/Roaches/Banes/Ultras for surrounds, moving Broods/Queens in positions to fight the main army of opponent, keeping creep spread going)
Just different kind of micro imo. For me I find Terran micro (marine splitting) to be hard.
I wouldn't call them "patch zergs", but I do think zerg has gotten less volatile since the patch and thereby safer in a tournament format. With the buffed queen and the faster OL for scouting, zerg is much less vulnerable to early timing attacks/cheese, and zerg players can safely take earlier expansions and go for the broodlord/infestor end game.
I think a lot of terran/protoss based their vs Z on the fact that zerg was inherently susceptible to early aggression/threat, and now they need to find other ways to play. Maybe some balancing is needed, but it's to early to tell imho.
On August 21 2012 03:14 Thurken wrote: The results in high level korean tournaments are really different than that, showing that a race is not imba at the moment, but more a metagame.
I dont think its about metagame, in my opinion most of this "terrans are doing fine in korea and bad outside" has to do with game design. Terran more micro intensive and requires more skill on high level then other races so only very top of terrans will do well. I dont think there is a patch that can fix it, we need to wait for add ons and hope that blizzard give terrans some less micro intesive units so weaker terran can do better.
People really need to stop asking Blizzard to lower the skill ceiling of terran. The other 2 races should rather be made as micro intesive, that way the better player would win more often than not. Right now I feel TvT and ZvZ(after the queen buff) are really the only 2 MUs where the better player wins almost always.
Terran is the most micro intensive race ?
Terran mainly involves relatively more movement based micro (Marines, Marauders, Medivac, Vikings, setting up right rallies, dropping, Hellions/Banshees move-kite). When playing mech, it becomes more positioning based though.
Protoss involves relatively more casting based micro (Sentry FF/GS, Stalker Blink, HT storm/feedbacks, warping in reinforcements) It does feel easier for me, which is why I used to main protoss.
Zerg involves relatively more positioning/map awareness micro (Keeping them Ovies pooping/floating, being active with mutas without them flying into turrets, positioning Zerglings/Roaches/Banes/Ultras for surrounds, moving Broods/Queens in positions to fight the main army of opponent, keeping creep spread going)
Just different kind of micro imo. For me I find Terran micro (marine splitting) to be hard.
Wait, you are telling me that all three races require different skill sets to play effectively and not all of them require studder-stepping?
On August 21 2012 03:14 Thurken wrote: The results in high level korean tournaments are really different than that, showing that a race is not imba at the moment, but more a metagame.
I dont think its about metagame, in my opinion most of this "terrans are doing fine in korea and bad outside" has to do with game design. Terran more micro intensive and requires more skill on high level then other races so only very top of terrans will do well. I dont think there is a patch that can fix it, we need to wait for add ons and hope that blizzard give terrans some less micro intesive units so weaker terran can do better.
People really need to stop asking Blizzard to lower the skill ceiling of terran. The other 2 races should rather be made as micro intesive, that way the better player would win more often than not. Right now I feel TvT and ZvZ(after the queen buff) are really the only 2 MUs where the better player wins almost always.
Terran is the most micro intensive race ?
Terran mainly involves relatively more movement based micro (Marines, Marauders, Medivac, Vikings, setting up right rallies, dropping, Hellions/Banshees move-kite). When playing mech, it becomes more positioning based though.
Protoss involves relatively more casting based micro (Sentry FF/GS, Stalker Blink, HT storm/feedbacks, warping in reinforcements) It does feel easier for me, which is why I used to main protoss.
Zerg involves relatively more positioning/map awareness micro (Keeping them Ovies pooping/floating, being active with mutas without them flying into turrets, positioning Zerglings/Roaches/Banes/Ultras for surrounds, moving Broods/Queens in positions to fight the main army of opponent, keeping creep spread going)
Just different kind of micro imo. For me I find Terran micro (marine splitting) to be hard.
Wait, you are telling me that all three races require different skill sets to play effectively and not all of them require studder-stepping?
Terran need to stutter step waayyy more than the others races, Split and kitt vs gling baneling, kitting vs Charlots, etc..
On August 20 2012 09:18 nkr wrote: Axiom: If the last balance update in truth is the reason these zergs made it to the top, one would assume high winrates in especially TvZ and possibly PvZ (some would argue that the overlord change made it easier for zerg to be greedy in this matchup as well) while their ZvZ winrates dropped off.
Why? Well we can safely assume that the balance in ZvZ was not affected by this or any previous patch, and while getting further in tournaments, they will now face the better pre-patch zergs. If these zergs in truth got to where they are because of the patch, they should lose more of these matches.
This is incredibly flawed in a number of ways. Assuming patchzergs exist as zergs who only are succeeding because of the patch...
1) Overall balance is ZvZ is not affected by patches but a particularly players style of ZvZ is. Example: Someone who goes hatch first more often benefited from the queen range more than someone who goes for early ling aggression.
2) There's no clear cut way to define "better pre-patch zergs" if these players weren't making it deep into tournaments to test their ZvZ. Furthermore, better is a subjective term particularly in the ZvZ matchup.
3) If patchzergs get to where they are because of the patch, they'll be competing with other patchzergs AND pre-patch zergs so their winrate won't necessarily change depending on who they hit in the tournament.
This is to say nothing of your small sample size. Your "safe assumptions" are far from safe and show you're really just trying to retaliate against people who use the term patchzerg.
On August 20 2012 09:18 nkr wrote: Axiom: If the last balance update in truth is the reason these zergs made it to the top, one would assume high winrates in especially TvZ and possibly PvZ (some would argue that the overlord change made it easier for zerg to be greedy in this matchup as well) while their ZvZ winrates dropped off.
Why? Well we can safely assume that the balance in ZvZ was not affected by this or any previous patch, and while getting further in tournaments, they will now face the better pre-patch zergs. If these zergs in truth got to where they are because of the patch, they should lose more of these matches.
This is incredibly flawed in a number of ways. Assuming patchzergs exist as zergs who only are succeeding because of the patch...
1) Overall balance is ZvZ is not affected by patches but a particularly players style of ZvZ is. Example: Someone who goes hatch first more often benefited from the queen range more than someone who goes for early ling aggression.
2) There's no clear cut way to define "better pre-patch zergs" if these players weren't making it deep into tournaments to test their ZvZ. Furthermore, better is a subjective term particularly in the ZvZ matchup.
3) If patchzergs get to where they are because of the patch, they'll be competing with other patchzergs AND pre-patch zergs so their winrate won't necessarily change depending on who they hit in the tournament.
This is to say nothing of your small sample size. Your "safe assumptions" are far from safe and show you're really just trying to retaliate against people who use the term patchzerg.
I was gonna say the same thing. Number 1 was especially annoying.
On August 21 2012 03:14 Thurken wrote: The results in high level korean tournaments are really different than that, showing that a race is not imba at the moment, but more a metagame.
I dont think its about metagame, in my opinion most of this "terrans are doing fine in korea and bad outside" has to do with game design. Terran more micro intensive and requires more skill on high level then other races so only very top of terrans will do well. I dont think there is a patch that can fix it, we need to wait for add ons and hope that blizzard give terrans some less micro intesive units so weaker terran can do better.
People really need to stop asking Blizzard to lower the skill ceiling of terran. The other 2 races should rather be made as micro intesive, that way the better player would win more often than not. Right now I feel TvT and ZvZ(after the queen buff) are really the only 2 MUs where the better player wins almost always.
Terran is the most micro intensive race ?
Terran mainly involves relatively more movement based micro (Marines, Marauders, Medivac, Vikings, setting up right rallies, dropping, Hellions/Banshees move-kite). When playing mech, it becomes more positioning based though.
Protoss involves relatively more casting based micro (Sentry FF/GS, Stalker Blink, HT storm/feedbacks, warping in reinforcements) It does feel easier for me, which is why I used to main protoss.
Zerg involves relatively more positioning/map awareness micro (Keeping them Ovies pooping/floating, being active with mutas without them flying into turrets, positioning Zerglings/Roaches/Banes/Ultras for surrounds, moving Broods/Queens in positions to fight the main army of opponent, keeping creep spread going)
Just different kind of micro imo. For me I find Terran micro (marine splitting) to be hard.
Casting is not "micro". Micro stands for micromanaging units in battle, a continuous action you need to be dedicating time and attention to to maximize your performance. Micro in its purest form is pulling a wounded unit away until it stops taking damage, then pushing it back into combat to deliver damage, splitting units to dodge AoE-based damage and focus firing.
Casting (especially in SC2) is instantaneous - it's more so about the decision making (when to cast and what to target) than it is about the physical requirement (handspeed, multitasking) that is inherent to micro and that makes micro an actual skill. The only exception being Blink, which is some sort of a weird semi-automatic micro.
Terran midgame micro is difficult, but also the most rewarding and most true to the term micro itself. In fact, Terran as a whole is the only race that satisfies all the requirements RTS gameplay must contain in order to be challenging in the right way (physically as well as strategically). Playing Terran is the staple of RTS gameplay, while the other two races deviate far too much in weird directions and lack the completeness and elegance in design. Protoss and, to a lesser extent, Zerg units feel more like strategic options you choose than physical tools you use to do things with.
I think this is ridiculous. If it were like 30%+ extra winrates I would be like hey that's true, but most of it is <10% win rate gain. Come on, they're just playing the strengths of their race better. It's pretty annoying reading the op. It just seems to be shitting on the 3 players it listed and then backing it up with "I like them, don't get me wrong".
On August 21 2012 06:43 MonkSEA wrote: I think this is ridiculous. If it were like 30%+ extra winrates I would be like hey that's true, but most of it is <10% win rate gain. Come on, they're just playing the strengths of their race better. It's pretty annoying reading the op. It just seems to be shitting on the 3 players it listed and then backing it up with "I like them, don't get me wrong".
I can see how you find it annoying, when you don't seem to understand a single word that was written in the OP. That's not what it says at all. It says the opposite actually.
On August 21 2012 06:43 MonkSEA wrote: I think this is ridiculous. If it were like 30%+ extra winrates I would be like hey that's true, but most of it is <10% win rate gain. Come on, they're just playing the strengths of their race better. It's pretty annoying reading the op. It just seems to be shitting on the 3 players it listed and then backing it up with "I like them, don't get me wrong".
You should consider your math. For example Vortix, goes from 51% to 65%. That isn't a +14%, that's actually a +-28% to his prepatch winrate. And that's quite huge if you know to read the numbers. Actually that's almost 2/3 wins against terrans.
On August 21 2012 03:46 NaEjeOn88 wrote: After the patch i switched to zerg cause its so much easier to play with lol. Patch Zergs do exist, good write up!!
Lol did you really switch from terran to zerg? O_O
It's an offensive term that basically takes credit away from hard working individuals that are achieving success. When a new zerg player that's been grinding out the game for years does well now they get hurled abuse about them being a patchzerg, I frankly can't wait to see the back of this stupid term, as it does more harm than it's worth
WCS Korea Winners bracket quarter finals - 4 Protoss
So what does this mean? That Korea has a different version of SC2 installed in which Protoss is super buffed? NO!!! It just means there are currently more performing Protoss in Korea atm compared to other races. Similarly, there are currently more performing Zergs in NA and EU compared to other races. Use your brain people.
On August 21 2012 00:08 AzoriuS wrote: Questioning someones success because u have problems with zergs and give them a title "patchzergs". I thought u will add Nerchio too and ashame yourself. If zerg is so op then tell me wheres Idra idol of teamliquid, wheres TLO, Sheth, Ret ? They all play zergs even prepatch and they are owned by koreans in every matchup.
The most funny thing are players who whine and make some "patchzergs" names arent even in masters league They struggle in diamond, plat,gold or even worse but they talk alot about balance instead of improving theirs macro. Balance is the problem in grandmaster/high master elo. Your only enemy dear whiners is macro.
First post i completly agree with, it just makes me laugh when all this platinum and silver players are whining on teamliquid and posting 1000x posts how its impossible to beat zerg. Oh yeah and i forgot how every1 is suposed to loose when playing against korean or he is a patchzerg.
Ok, but when even the top Terrans feel there's an issue with the matchup we should disregard them too? You can't castigate 'all the silver and platinum' players for having their opinion, and also disregard what top Terrans believe regarding the matchup.
It's great when people reduce the argument to ad hominem attacks on players supposed skill levels.
I didnt notice that majority of top terran are complaining(they kind of cant, looking at torunament results etc. or every1 would laugh at them) and beside that i was targeting with my post majority of this forum. Its not top terrans that post on every page "omfggg patch zergs blabla imba", and thats how live report threads of every tournament looks like at the moment.
This is true. The only complaints you see from professional terrans are outbursts of frustration on twitter right after a match saying “Zerg IMBA”. Most of them say that the match up is hard and discuss the holes they see in the current builds. But at the end of the day, I have not seen a single terran that is worth talking about complain the match up is totally broken.
After all, while we are all doing this, MVP is practicing.
If by practicing you mean snorkeling in a pool filled with his tournament trophies then yes, you are correct sir.
My personal view for Vortix, he has always been very impressive and solid since his entrance into the scene. It takes a real good player to take games off players like Squirtle and Mvp. He, in my opinion would have made it to where he is now regardless of any patch. He's a very impressive and solid player and I love seeing his play.
Just seen this on Suppy's stream: entire top 6 NA is zerg
When I checked yesterday, 3 out of top5 EU GM were terran (Happy, ForGG, BratOK I believe it was), so doesn't really say much tbh. Who tops the GM ladder depends so much on who plays the most etc as so many GM players have similar winratios.
On August 22 2012 09:20 PauseBreak wrote: Just go to SC2 ranks. And look and the saturation of Zerg. Zerg players should just email sc2.ranks.com and tell them they are biased.
Here are the worldwide Zerg saturation stats from sc2.ranks.com:
Division: Zerg/Division Total ~ percentage of Zerg within league GM: 457/1239 ~ 36.88% Masters: 9900 /29300 ~33.79% Diamond: 17941/50900 ~35.25% Plat: 29948/86300 ~34.70% Gold: 35669/113800 ~31.34% Silver: 41246/153000 ~26.93% Bronze: 49900/225000 ~22.18%
You still miss what the LR threads are complaining about. We are watching the games, and watching mechanically bad players push MVP (among others) to the limit. Watching Vortix 1a his whole army from the the east side of the map to the west over and over to deal with a single marine drop is what is making people mad. Its stuff like that. The patch let zergs get to end game without having any issues, where they can compete on an even ground against better opponents.
Now maybe its an issue with infestor/brood being too easy to execute. But we call them 'patchzergs' because at least before the patch, you needed skill to get to infestor/brood. Infestor buff followed by queen buff gives Zergs their free ez mode lategame comp. Thats the issue.
If you can give me a legitmate reason not to call them patchzergs (cause your stats, while small, actually prove patchzergs exist. Your zvz argument is flawed), then i'll stop. But until they do the small things that separate a good player from a bad player, the flames wont stop. Tell me how you can defend them with so many examples like the one I gave above. Are we watching the same games?
all three of these Zergs were on the rise before the patch hit. they would be beasting it up right now regardless. and this is coming from a terran player.
On August 22 2012 13:42 ohampatu wrote: lol. this thread still kicking.
sample size too small
You still miss what the LR threads are complaining about. We are watching the games, and watching mechanically bad players push MVP (among others) to the limit. Watching Vortix 1a his whole army from the the east side of the map to the west over and over to deal with a single marine drop is what is making people mad. Its stuff like that. The patch let zergs get to end game without having any issues, where they can compete on an even ground against better opponents.
Now maybe its an issue with infestor/brood being too easy to execute. But we call them 'patchzergs' because at least before the patch, you needed skill to get to infestor/brood. Infestor buff followed by queen buff gives Zergs their free ez mode lategame comp. Thats the issue.
If you can give me a legitmate reason not to call them patchzergs (cause your stats, while small, actually prove patchzergs exist. Your zvz argument is flawed), then i'll stop. But until they do the small things that separate a good player from a bad player, the flames wont stop. Tell me how you can defend them with so many examples like the one I gave above. Are we watching the same games?
To some extent this is actually a good point, but it doesn't change the fact that all three of these Zergs' results had already begun to significantly improve before the patch hit. Also, sLivko is legitimately kickass and obviously has a level of skill comprable to top foreigners of the other two races.
Your results makes no sense. All three of them had drastically improved zvt, vortix even went up 14%. Do you understand how huge 14% is? This is clearly due to the patch.
On August 22 2012 13:42 ohampatu wrote: lol. this thread still kicking.
sample size too small
You still miss what the LR threads are complaining about. We are watching the games, and watching mechanically bad players push MVP (among others) to the limit. Watching Vortix 1a his whole army from the the east side of the map to the west over and over to deal with a single marine drop is what is making people mad. Its stuff like that. The patch let zergs get to end game without having any issues, where they can compete on an even ground against better opponents.
Now maybe its an issue with infestor/brood being too easy to execute. But we call them 'patchzergs' because at least before the patch, you needed skill to get to infestor/brood. Infestor buff followed by queen buff gives Zergs their free ez mode lategame comp. Thats the issue.
If you can give me a legitmate reason not to call them patchzergs (cause your stats, while small, actually prove patchzergs exist. Your zvz argument is flawed), then i'll stop. But until they do the small things that separate a good player from a bad player, the flames wont stop. Tell me how you can defend them with so many examples like the one I gave above. Are we watching the same games?
To some extent this is actually a good point, but it doesn't change the fact that all three of these Zergs' results had already begun to significantly improve before the patch hit. Also, sLivko is legitimately kickass and obviously has a level of skill comprable to top foreigners of the other two races.
yea im not picking and choosing names of who are and aren't, i just feel that people are missing what we are complaining about. you see zergs getting to points in the game (aka lategame) that they couldn't before (not necessarily these zergs in the op either), because zergs defenders advantage is soo good at this point.
From what I see, zergs who can't do the little things that make the good zergs pro, are now making it to a point in the game where the small things dont matter as much. MVP won because he abused their mechanics, but alot of these zergs aren't getting abused early game as much because terrans/protoss are afraid to attack into a zergs defenses. I dont even think its the queen, i think its a combination of a lot of things from the last two patches. But im bordering on calling infestor/brood op so i should prolly stop
edit: and im sorry the post i made that the above user quoted used vortex as an example, he may be the next huge star, it was just an example from recent games/mistakes that we saw
On August 22 2012 14:48 akalarry wrote: it's not just the patches but the ridiculously gigantic maps that are being played nowadays
Big maps don't even necessarily favor zerg.... Calm before the storm is the biggest map that has been played competitively in 1v1, and it wasn't zerg favored against terran or protoss.
On August 22 2012 14:48 akalarry wrote: it's not just the patches but the ridiculously gigantic maps that are being played nowadays
Big maps don't even necessarily favor zerg.... Calm before the storm is the biggest map that has been played competitively in 1v1, and it wasn't zerg favored against terran or protoss.
Should also mention that map is really easy to take and protect 3 bases, and much harder to take endgame bases 4+.
I actually was very sceptical about this patchzerg thing and was just thinking that It's just people complaining about nothing, but then I've started noticing weird things, like mostly zergs are now on tournament tables, some of my friends that play ladder as zerg suddenly skyrocketed from gold to diamond in the matter of weeks, some Pro-Zerg players, that I've always thought was mediocre suddenly became top tier players, hell I didn't even know who VortiX was, until his Empire All-Kill in IPL TAC.
And now Nerchio, VortiX, Slivko, Bly and many others are on the same level of play as MVP, MC, MKP, MMA. I really love all those "new" zerg players, but something strange is happening, that's for sure.
Althought there are no direct proofs, and winrates are still ~50% I'm sure that Patchzergs do exist.
On August 22 2012 16:20 Rimak wrote: I actually was very sceptical about this patchzerg thing and was just thinking that It's just people complaining about nothing, but then I've started noticing weird things, like mostly zergs are now on tournament tables, some of my friends that play ladder as zerg suddenly skyrocketed from gold to diamond in the matter of weeks, some Pro-Zerg players, that I've always thought was mediocre suddenly became top tier players, hell I didn't even know who VortiX was, until his Empire All-Kill in IPL TAC.
And now Nerchio, VortiX, Slivko, Bly and many others are on the same level of play as MVP, MC, MKP, MMA. I really love all those "new" zerg players, but something strange is happening, that's for sure.
Althought there are no direct proofs, and winrates are still ~50% I'm sure that Patchzergs do exist.
these are the kinda posts we dont want
i would recommend to read my last two posts
nerchio, slivko, and bly have been known for quite a while, and thats coming from the dude who just posted two wall of texts explaining how patchzergs exist
On August 22 2012 16:20 Rimak wrote: I actually was very sceptical about this patchzerg thing and was just thinking that It's just people complaining about nothing, but then I've started noticing weird things, like mostly zergs are now on tournament tables, some of my friends that play ladder as zerg suddenly skyrocketed from gold to diamond in the matter of weeks, some Pro-Zerg players, that I've always thought was mediocre suddenly became top tier players, hell I didn't even know who VortiX was, until his Empire All-Kill in IPL TAC.
And now Nerchio, VortiX, Slivko, Bly and many others are on the same level of play as MVP, MC, MKP, MMA. I really love all those "new" zerg players, but something strange is happening, that's for sure.
Althought there are no direct proofs, and winrates are still ~50% I'm sure that Patchzergs do exist.
In what universe is Nerchio,slivko or Bly "new" zergs? hell, nerchio is one of the strongest foreigners in the scene, has been for quite some time.
And by watching VortiX play you can see the patch itself doesn't help him much really, he doesn't even use queens for defence early game.. What does help him is probably the metagame shift, that now more often gets to the lategame, where his broodlord pushes really shine. his earlygame looks really weak compared to other zergs tho, maybe if terrans punished that more he wouldn't look so strong.
And i can guarantee you that the gold zergs becoming diamond has nothing to do with the patch, seeing as there are alot less terrans on ladder compared to Z players and P players, and the patch change didn't really affect those matchups very much.
On August 22 2012 16:20 Rimak wrote: I actually was very sceptical about this patchzerg thing and was just thinking that It's just people complaining about nothing, but then I've started noticing weird things, like mostly zergs are now on tournament tables, some of my friends that play ladder as zerg suddenly skyrocketed from gold to diamond in the matter of weeks, some Pro-Zerg players, that I've always thought was mediocre suddenly became top tier players, hell I didn't even know who VortiX was, until his Empire All-Kill in IPL TAC.
And now Nerchio, VortiX, Slivko, Bly and many others are on the same level of play as MVP, MC, MKP, MMA. I really love all those "new" zerg players, but something strange is happening, that's for sure.
Althought there are no direct proofs, and winrates are still ~50% I'm sure that Patchzergs do exist.
these are the kinda posts we dont want
i would recommend to read my last two posts
nerchio, slivko, and bly have been known for quite a while, and thats coming from the dude who just posted two wall of texts explaining how patchzergs exist
On August 22 2012 16:20 Rimak wrote: I actually was very sceptical about this patchzerg thing and was just thinking that It's just people complaining about nothing, but then I've started noticing weird things, like mostly zergs are now on tournament tables, some of my friends that play ladder as zerg suddenly skyrocketed from gold to diamond in the matter of weeks, some Pro-Zerg players, that I've always thought was mediocre suddenly became top tier players, hell I didn't even know who VortiX was, until his Empire All-Kill in IPL TAC.
And now Nerchio, VortiX, Slivko, Bly and many others are on the same level of play as MVP, MC, MKP, MMA. I really love all those "new" zerg players, but something strange is happening, that's for sure.
Althought there are no direct proofs, and winrates are still ~50% I'm sure that Patchzergs do exist.
In what universe is Nerchio,slivko or Bly "new" zergs? hell, nerchio is one of the strongest foreigners in the scene, has been for quite some time.
And by watching VortiX play you can see the patch itself doesn't help him much really, he doesn't even use queens for defence early game.. What does help him is probably the metagame shift, that now more often gets to the lategame, where his broodlord pushes really shine. his earlygame looks really weak compared to other zergs tho, maybe if terrans punished that more he wouldn't look so strong.
And i can guarantee you that the gold zergs becoming diamond has nothing to do with the patch, seeing as there are alot less terrans on ladder compared to Z players and P players, and the patch change didn't really affect those matchups very much.
I'm not saying they are NEW zergs, I'm just saying, that they play really strong right now, and i mean STRONG. And to be clear I'm not saying that it is BAD.
Even more I'm really enjoing games played by VortiX and I've been Slivko's fan long before he became really good.
The point was that I've started noticing more and more foreign zergs getting to the same level as korean pro's, and i find it kind of odd.
This whole Patch Zerg term just keeps making me think of Robin Williams in the movie Patch Adams with that ridiculous red clown nose...
While I'm inclined to say that Patch Zergs exist, the examples being used in this thread are laughable. Vortix was pretty consistent in top EU GM before the patch, Nerchio has been a beast forever and Slivko made his name long before the patch.
I have to agree with ohampatu, watching recent TvZs seems more telling than win percentages. Once Zerg hits the infestor/BL deathball they can make so many mistakes while Terran has such a small margin for error. Gone are the days of ling/bling/muta all game long, and Zerg no longer needs to rely on multiple remaxes in the late game. With somewhat decent infestor usage and no severe lapses in BroodLord control Zerg suddenly has a highly cost effective late game army. Terran is now the race that needs to be constantly replenishing cheep units.
Nice article, though. You didn't go into full detail with phi square checks and so on, but you have a reasonable demonstration here. The real killer of the patchzerg idea, though, is the fact that there are no breakout Zergs in Korea, where Hellion play was the biggest and the Queen buff hurt the most. All the Zergs we see doing well were solid prior to the patch or are goddamn Broodwar legends.
That said, Terran especially seems to be hurting right now, although I think it might just be a metagame shift, as lategame strategies like mass Orbital in TvP and Sky Terran transitions in TvZ come to the fore. If those strategies end up crashing and burning, then T might need a patch. But I'd like to see these strategies fully tested before any patching, because what would suck most is to see them never be fully developed because Blizzard gave the Marine 7 damage. They're really cool builds.
The 1A syndrome... Moving the whole army to fight a single drop is ONLY an error if the enemy actually exploits it... If the Terran attacks 2-3 Places at once the Zerg pays for sending his whole army to one place, if the Terran is only attacking one place at a time sending your whole army is actually the best answer possible.
Don't blame the Zergs for getting away with this... No Patch or anything has something to do with this. If there is only 1 Place to defend at one time it's actually "smart" to take your whole army to defend it because you will get rid of it faster while using less units lost.
Zergs should pay for moving their whole army to defend against some small drop.. But the Terran/Protoss/Whoever has to make them pay....
On August 22 2012 17:30 Velr wrote: The 1A syndrome... Moving the whole army to fight a single drop is ONLY an error if the enemy actually exploits it... If the Terran attacks 2-3 Places at once the Zerg pays for sending his whole army to one place, if the Terran is only attacking one place at a time sending your whole army is actually the best answer possible.
Don't blame the Zergs for getting away with this... No Patch or anything has something to do with this. If there is only 1 Place to defend at one time it's actually "smart" to take your whole army to defend it because you will get rid of it faster while using less units lost.
Zergs should pay for moving their whole army to defend against some small drop.. But the Terran/Protoss/Whoever has to make them pay....
Captain obvious here didn't watch Mvp's games. That's why we know they are not good, as they were moving one big army around to try to deal with multi-drops. Surprise surprise, it didn't end up working well, although they somehow still made the games look close.
On August 22 2012 17:22 SupLilSon wrote: This whole Patch Zerg term just keeps making me think of Robin Williams in the movie Patch Adams with that ridiculous red clown nose...
While I'm inclined to say that Patch Zergs exist, the examples being used in this thread are laughable. Vortix was pretty consistent in top EU GM before the patch, Nerchio has been a beast forever and Slivko made his name long before the patch.
I have to agree with ohampatu, watching recent TvZs seems more telling than win percentages. Once Zerg hits the infestor/BL deathball they can make so many mistakes while Terran has such a small margin for error. Gone are the days of ling/bling/muta all game long, and Zerg no longer needs to rely on multiple remaxes in the late game. With somewhat decent infestor usage and no severe lapses in BroodLord control Zerg suddenly has a highly cost effective late game army. Terran is now the race that needs to be constantly replenishing cheep units.
Yeah, I don't like the metagame. Most zergs realise that once they have that deathball it's very hard for terran to win the game. What happens is that they turtle forever on ling/bling/roach/infestor untill they have that composition. It's a terrible style to watch but fairly succesful.
Patchforeigner is a term used to describe the sudden appearance of a foreigner in the international scene. Common traits are overhype, playing either protoss or zerg, doing much better everytime a patch hits that affects their race positively, being able to take games off koreans that are undoubtedly better in every aspect of the game coupled with falling off as soon as certain balance issues are remedied and doing the best broodlord pushes [tasteless] has ever seen in his life. While it is obvious that the spontaneous raise in skill of said patchforeigner is not coincidental, the common fanboy refuses to believe that there is any link between balance issues and the foreign community doing well. As opposed to ordinary foreigners who only get recogntion for nationality and rude behavior and fail to get the foreign community's hopes up patchforeigners still manage to do so by looking promising - until everyone realizes what race they play. It usually takes an Mvp to make them realize.
On August 22 2012 17:30 Velr wrote: The 1A syndrome... Moving the whole army to fight a single drop is ONLY an error if the enemy actually exploits it... If the Terran attacks 2-3 Places at once the Zerg pays for sending his whole army to one place, if the Terran is only attacking one place at a time sending your whole army is actually the best answer possible.
Don't blame the Zergs for getting away with this... No Patch or anything has something to do with this. If there is only 1 Place to defend at one time it's actually "smart" to take your whole army to defend it because you will get rid of it faster while using less units lost.
Zergs should pay for moving their whole army to defend against some small drop.. But the Terran/Protoss/Whoever has to make them pay....
Hell, we saw 'the best protoss in the world', Seed, do it yesterday against Polt..
I am a patch zerg. I switched to zerg after this patch and was able to get to masters. I had previously been playing terran for 2 years and was unable to ever get out of diamond. coincidence?
On August 22 2012 17:30 Velr wrote: The 1A syndrome... Moving the whole army to fight a single drop is ONLY an error if the enemy actually exploits it... If the Terran attacks 2-3 Places at once the Zerg pays for sending his whole army to one place, if the Terran is only attacking one place at a time sending your whole army is actually the best answer possible.
Don't blame the Zergs for getting away with this... No Patch or anything has something to do with this. If there is only 1 Place to defend at one time it's actually "smart" to take your whole army to defend it because you will get rid of it faster while using less units lost.
Zergs should pay for moving their whole army to defend against some small drop.. But the Terran/Protoss/Whoever has to make them pay....
Hell, we saw 'the best protoss in the world', Seed, do it yesterday against Polt..
Not the same thing at all, 4 full medivacs in TvP by midgame (nearly impossible to clean without AoE) is not comparable to 1 full medivac in TvZ by lategame in which Zergs can afford lots of Spines.
On August 22 2012 17:30 Velr wrote: The 1A syndrome... Moving the whole army to fight a single drop is ONLY an error if the enemy actually exploits it... If the Terran attacks 2-3 Places at once the Zerg pays for sending his whole army to one place, if the Terran is only attacking one place at a time sending your whole army is actually the best answer possible.
Don't blame the Zergs for getting away with this... No Patch or anything has something to do with this. If there is only 1 Place to defend at one time it's actually "smart" to take your whole army to defend it because you will get rid of it faster while using less units lost.
Zergs should pay for moving their whole army to defend against some small drop.. But the Terran/Protoss/Whoever has to make them pay....
Captain obvious here didn't watch Mvp's games. That's why we know they are not good, as they were moving one big army around to try to deal with multi-drops. Surprise surprise, it didn't end up working well, although they somehow still made the games look close.
I did watch them. MVP won.
Your point exactly is?
If other Terrans are not able to exploit this (huge) flaw in the Zergs play then they are probably "prepatchsince1.0imbalanced"-Terrans.
It's like letting a Zerg drone up to 80 Drones whiteout doing anything to him and then claiming he has no skill because his enemy never took advantage of the Zergs greed.
On August 22 2012 18:10 artosismermaid wrote: I am a patch zerg. I switched to zerg after this patch and was able to get to masters. I had previously been playing terran for 2 years and was unable to ever get out of diamond. coincidence?
Lol, i did actually too. I played terran for so long and never got out of diamond, now just got my Z mechanics to good level and got to masters. So i guess not so much coincidence. Z is easier on our level.
[Edit] We are not patch zergs though. Patch zergs are previous ZERGS that have had more succes post patch than pre patch. But generally, the patch triggered our switch? no?
On August 22 2012 17:30 Velr wrote: The 1A syndrome... Moving the whole army to fight a single drop is ONLY an error if the enemy actually exploits it... If the Terran attacks 2-3 Places at once the Zerg pays for sending his whole army to one place, if the Terran is only attacking one place at a time sending your whole army is actually the best answer possible.
Don't blame the Zergs for getting away with this... No Patch or anything has something to do with this. If there is only 1 Place to defend at one time it's actually "smart" to take your whole army to defend it because you will get rid of it faster while using less units lost.
Zergs should pay for moving their whole army to defend against some small drop.. But the Terran/Protoss/Whoever has to make them pay....
If the Terran is only attacking 1 place at a time but the attack is in form of a drop harass, then no, sending your whole army is not the best possible answer as you would be out of position.
On August 22 2012 17:30 Velr wrote: The 1A syndrome... Moving the whole army to fight a single drop is ONLY an error if the enemy actually exploits it... If the Terran attacks 2-3 Places at once the Zerg pays for sending his whole army to one place, if the Terran is only attacking one place at a time sending your whole army is actually the best answer possible.
Don't blame the Zergs for getting away with this... No Patch or anything has something to do with this. If there is only 1 Place to defend at one time it's actually "smart" to take your whole army to defend it because you will get rid of it faster while using less units lost.
Zergs should pay for moving their whole army to defend against some small drop.. But the Terran/Protoss/Whoever has to make them pay....
If the Terran is only attacking 1 place at a time but the attack is in form of a drop harass, then no, sending your whole army is not the best possible answer as you would be out of position.
Which is only a problem when the Terran is actually exploiting it. Else it's a good way to deal with it because a much more powerfull force will kill a smaller force in less time with less losses.
The ball to exploit that "shit" is on the Terrans foot, not on the Zergs and the Patch has just about nothing to do with it.
On August 22 2012 18:45 Velr wrote: Which is only a problem when the Terran is actually exploiting it. Else it's a good way to deal with it because a much more powerfull force will kill a smaller force in less time with less losses.
The ball to exploit that "shit" is on the Terrans foot, not on the Zergs and the Patch has just about nothing to do with it.
Yeah, obviously you need 120 army supply to deal with 8 Marines and 1 Medivac. You can't send enough to quickly crush the drop but not everything so that the Terran is not able to gain ground...
On August 22 2012 18:10 artosismermaid wrote: I am a patch zerg. I switched to zerg after this patch and was able to get to masters. I had previously been playing terran for 2 years and was unable to ever get out of diamond. coincidence?
Lol, i did actually too. I played terran for so long and never got out of diamond, now just got my Z mechanics to good level and got to masters. So i guess not so much coincidence. Z is easier on our level.
[Edit] We are not patch zergs though. Patch zergs are previous ZERGS that have had more succes post patch than pre patch. But generally, the patch triggered our switch? no?
Zergs easier to get to masters than Terran with, it's been like this for a long time so it's not just this patch. Zerg starts getting harder at really high levels while Terran gets harder at around diamond.
Getting sick of this patchzerg debate when we clearly see the best Toss and Terrans still winning/placing high with regularity.
Yes Prepatch Zerg was absolutely struggling to a couple of very early timing attacks that Blizzard, rightly imho thought were slightly imbalancing the game and addressed them bringing the game back to balance.
What we have subsequently witnessed is as the game matured it has taken longer for our top players to tweak the metagame now these early attacks against zerg are less potent.
Taeja and MVP continue to do it for the Terrans and multiple Toss have also now found appropriate responses.
If anything Toss is now the dominant race due to their advantage in lategame v Terran and having several strong counters to Zergs 3 base play. Should we be talking about Toss players improving purely because of the insanely strong sentry/immortal push out at 10.30 and kill all Zergs opening?'
The answer is of course not! We should be looking to the worlds top Zergs to find the army composition/drone ratio sweet spot to defend it.
On August 22 2012 18:45 Velr wrote: Which is only a problem when the Terran is actually exploiting it. Else it's a good way to deal with it because a much more powerfull force will kill a smaller force in less time with less losses.
The ball to exploit that "shit" is on the Terrans foot, not on the Zergs and the Patch has just about nothing to do with it.
Yeah, obviously you need 120 army supply to deal with 8 Marines and 1 Medivac. You can't send enough to quickly crush the drop but not everything so that the Terran is not able to gain ground...
Which is only a problem if the Terran is exploiting it. Terran that does not exploit that --> stay unpunished Terran that does exploit that --> lose ground, be out of position, get a disadvantage
It's what is called skill. Find those mistakes and punish them. Flash comment on SC2 drops: "It's a basic play that anyone can do so that's not much of a problem. What's more important is making a situation where that ends up working. I haven't been able to do that yet."
On August 22 2012 17:30 Velr wrote: The 1A syndrome... Moving the whole army to fight a single drop is ONLY an error if the enemy actually exploits it... If the Terran attacks 2-3 Places at once the Zerg pays for sending his whole army to one place, if the Terran is only attacking one place at a time sending your whole army is actually the best answer possible.
Don't blame the Zergs for getting away with this... No Patch or anything has something to do with this. If there is only 1 Place to defend at one time it's actually "smart" to take your whole army to defend it because you will get rid of it faster while using less units lost.
Zergs should pay for moving their whole army to defend against some small drop.. But the Terran/Protoss/Whoever has to make them pay....
If the Terran is only attacking 1 place at a time but the attack is in form of a drop harass, then no, sending your whole army is not the best possible answer as you would be out of position.
Which is only a problem when the Terran is actually exploiting it. Else it's a good way to deal with it because a much more powerfull force will kill a smaller force in less time with less losses.
The ball to exploit that "shit" is on the Terrans foot, not on the Zergs and the Patch has just about nothing to do with it.
Say you were in a game and a drop happens to you and you were Zerg vs Terran, you don't know what his plans are, would you send your whole army to defend the drop? The aformentioned Zergs did this without knowing what the Terran's plans are. This is a poor decision unless you know that the Terran is not gonna do anything except that drop. Even so, I wouldn't send all my units for a 1 medivac drop.
On August 22 2012 18:45 Velr wrote: Which is only a problem when the Terran is actually exploiting it. Else it's a good way to deal with it because a much more powerfull force will kill a smaller force in less time with less losses.
The ball to exploit that "shit" is on the Terrans foot, not on the Zergs and the Patch has just about nothing to do with it.
Yeah, obviously you need 120 army supply to deal with 8 Marines and 1 Medivac. You can't send enough to quickly crush the drop but not everything so that the Terran is not able to gain ground...
Do you have troubles reading?
People here are bitching about Zergs sending their hole army to defend against 8 Marines and getting away with it, this is the Terrans fault, not the Zergs. If the Terran is too bad to exploit this flaw in the Zergs reaction then the Terran is to blame... Not some "Patch" or whatever. If the Terran is not exploiting this weakness sending a BIG army to defend against a tiny one is actually the better answer then sending "just enough".
A flaw in a play is only a problem if the enemy is capable of exploiting it... Most Terrans seem to not do that (or not doing it harsh enough), so Zergs keep on "1A-Syndroming". Sometimes they lose cause of it, often it doesn't matter.
It's the same like many Terrans losing their Vkining clump to a few Fungals, Broodlords dieing to 1 Vortex/Toilet... Flaws in play which with a bit better control could be erradicated... But they don't seem to punish you hard enough so it will take some time until not only the very, very, very best will stop doing these mistakes.
On August 22 2012 18:45 Velr wrote: Which is only a problem when the Terran is actually exploiting it. Else it's a good way to deal with it because a much more powerfull force will kill a smaller force in less time with less losses.
The ball to exploit that "shit" is on the Terrans foot, not on the Zergs and the Patch has just about nothing to do with it.
Yeah, obviously you need 120 army supply to deal with 8 Marines and 1 Medivac. You can't send enough to quickly crush the drop but not everything so that the Terran is not able to gain ground...
Which is only a problem if the Terran is exploiting it. Terran that does not exploit that --> stay unpunished Terran that does exploit that --> lose ground, be out of position, get a disadvantage
You can't always know if there are only speedlings (and how many of them) or if he was dumb enough to pull back his Infestors and BLs too.
Comparing winrates before and after for these guys shows nothing... THe level of competition they faced changed quite a bit considering they have been more known / playing bigger matches. You can't just say the winrates are similar thus they are not patchzergs...
People should take a class or think a bit before posting their 'statistics' insights...
On August 22 2012 19:17 Velr wrote: Yeah, "scan"...
You're aware that depending on maps Zerg can have his army pretty much anywhere, especially with Ultras? Are you supposed to scan 5 screens just to try to exploit something Zerg should never do anyway? Geez.
Well, it doesn't matter anyway. Those zerg aren't the best zerg and they will never defeat the top level, if there was real imbalance, top players would lose to noob patchzergs.
On August 22 2012 17:30 Velr wrote: The 1A syndrome... Moving the whole army to fight a single drop is ONLY an error if the enemy actually exploits it... If the Terran attacks 2-3 Places at once the Zerg pays for sending his whole army to one place, if the Terran is only attacking one place at a time sending your whole army is actually the best answer possible.
Don't blame the Zergs for getting away with this... No Patch or anything has something to do with this. If there is only 1 Place to defend at one time it's actually "smart" to take your whole army to defend it because you will get rid of it faster while using less units lost.
Zergs should pay for moving their whole army to defend against some small drop.. But the Terran/Protoss/Whoever has to make them pay....
If the Terran is only attacking 1 place at a time but the attack is in form of a drop harass, then no, sending your whole army is not the best possible answer as you would be out of position.
Which is only a problem when the Terran is actually exploiting it. Else it's a good way to deal with it because a much more powerfull force will kill a smaller force in less time with less losses.
The ball to exploit that "shit" is on the Terrans foot, not on the Zergs and the Patch has just about nothing to do with it.
Say you were in a game and a drop happens to you and you were Zerg vs Terran, you don't know what his plans are, would you send your whole army to defend the drop? The aformentioned Zergs did this without knowing what the Terran's plans are. This is a poor decision unless you know that the Terran is not gonna do anything except that drop. Even so, I wouldn't send all my units for a 1 medivac drop.
Well, I can see the patchzergs coming out in the lower leagues. I've been playing a lot of games vs diamond zergs lately. And the more I play them the less I fear them.
A couple of months back meeting a diamond level zerg was scary for me. In most cases he could take me apart with superior multitasking, mutalisk harass, denying bases etc. Now meeting such zerg is a real treat - I wonder where did those guys go. Oh yeah, masters league probably.
The new, improved diamond patchzerg is just sitting there, building queens and waiting for the infestor/bl to come out. He is able to pick me apart with that composition in 95% of games (if he gets there), still - I'm just no longer impressed.
In the end I like the way this patch works out as it gives me more time to be aggressive and have some good poking around, sniping bases etc. Now I'm even no longer frustrated with sniping the third into losing-to-deathball scenarios, as these things seem to be quite common even on pro level (see Vortix's games on IEM).
For me the "old-style" TvZ was more fun to watch but much harder to play. Now, with the patchzergs around it seems that it is the other way around.
On August 22 2012 19:29 scypio wrote: Well, I can see the patchzergs coming out in the lower leagues. I've been playing a lot of games vs diamond zergs lately. And the more I play them the less I fear them.
A couple of months back meeting a diamond level zerg was scary for me. In most cases he could take me apart with superior multitasking, mutalisk harass, denying bases etc. Now meeting such zerg is a real treat - I wonder where did those guys go. Oh yeah, masters league probably.
The new, improved diamond patchzerg is just sitting there, building queens and waiting for the infestor/bl to come out. He is able to pick me apart with that composition in 95% of games (if he gets there), still - I'm just no longer impressed.
In the end I like the way this patch works out as it gives me more time to be aggressive and have some good poking around, sniping bases etc. Now I'm even no longer frustrated with sniping the third into losing-to-deathball scenarios, as these things seem to be quite common even on pro level (see Vortix's games on IEM).
For me the "old-style" TvZ was more fun to watch but much harder to play. Now, with the patchzergs around it seems that it is the other way around.
It's actually quite funny the other way round as well. Having those Terrans that either go for a 2base allin or 3-4CC+mech opening and you're just sitting on a solid 2base economy and kill them with some basic roach play. I guess thats why many toplevel zergs like nerchio still prefer the 7min or later expansions.
On August 22 2012 18:45 Velr wrote: Which is only a problem when the Terran is actually exploiting it. Else it's a good way to deal with it because a much more powerfull force will kill a smaller force in less time with less losses.
The ball to exploit that "shit" is on the Terrans foot, not on the Zergs and the Patch has just about nothing to do with it.
Yeah, obviously you need 120 army supply to deal with 8 Marines and 1 Medivac. You can't send enough to quickly crush the drop but not everything so that the Terran is not able to gain ground...
Do you have troubles reading?
People here are bitching about Zergs sending their hole army to defend against 8 Marines and getting away with it, this is the Terrans fault, not the Zergs. If the Terran is too bad to exploit this flaw in the Zergs reaction then the Terran is to blame... Not some "Patch" or whatever. If the Terran is not exploiting this weakness sending a BIG army to defend against a tiny one is actually the better answer then sending "just enough".
A flaw in a play is only a problem if the enemy is capable of exploiting it... Most Terrans seem to not do that (or not doing it harsh enough), so Zergs keep on "1A-Syndroming". Sometimes they lose cause of it, often it doesn't matter.
It's the same like many Terrans losing their Vkining clump to a few Fungals, Broodlords dieing to 1 Vortex/Toilet... Flaws in play which with a bit better control could be erradicated... But they don't seem to punish you hard enough so it will take some time until not only the very, very, very best will stop doing these mistakes.
Please watch the games. You are like a step behind everyone.
I think the main imbalance is the difference in skill required to play each race. I wish blizzard would raise the skill ceiling for protoss and zerg in HotS, but instead it looks like they're making terran easier - and that makes me really sad. I love playing terran as it is now.
EPT
SortOf
other than that I wholeheartedly agree with your post.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/9403C.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/5LSAV.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_yI3p8aRQnHo/TLVsXQJDdsI/AAAAAAAAHsk/o8i-ubu-Lio/s1600/30923.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/vAtzs.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/UnV0q.jpg)
