On November 11 2012 17:05 scarper65 wrote: I still don't understand why blizzard nerfed ghosts while leaving infestors untouched. Just bring the old ghosts back and there wouldn't be any problems.
TvZ is actually the smaller issue. Terrans at least have ravens so there is a potential late game in TvZ that can be attempted with reasonable success rates. PvZ is one big all-in fest, because no Protoss will go into late game willingly.
On November 11 2012 17:05 scarper65 wrote: I still don't understand why blizzard nerfed ghosts while leaving infestors untouched. Just bring the old ghosts back and there wouldn't be any problems.
TvZ is actually the smaller issue. Terrans at least have ravens so there is a potential late game in TvZ that can be attempted with reasonable success rates. PvZ is one big all-in fest, because no Protoss will go into late game willingly.
Ravens against infestors? It is pretty much the same as mothership. You pray that they don't get fungaled.
And Protoss actually have a timing. The only Terran timing now is the 11/11.
On November 11 2012 17:05 scarper65 wrote: I still don't understand why blizzard nerfed ghosts while leaving infestors untouched. Just bring the old ghosts back and there wouldn't be any problems.
TvZ is actually the smaller issue. Terrans at least have ravens so there is a potential late game in TvZ that can be attempted with reasonable success rates. PvZ is one big all-in fest, because no Protoss will go into late game willingly.
Ravens against infestors? It is pretty much the same as mothership. You pray that they don't get fungaled.
And Protoss actually have a timing. The only Terran timing now is the 11/11.
That is why you also have other units beside ravens. And I said it is smaller issue, not that it is not the issue. Point was that just rolling back the old ghost won't solve this.
On November 11 2012 17:05 scarper65 wrote: I still don't understand why blizzard nerfed ghosts while leaving infestors untouched. Just bring the old ghosts back and there wouldn't be any problems.
TvZ is actually the smaller issue. Terrans at least have ravens so there is a potential late game in TvZ that can be attempted with reasonable success rates. PvZ is one big all-in fest, because no Protoss will go into late game willingly.
Ravens against infestors? It is pretty much the same as mothership. You pray that they don't get fungaled.
And Protoss actually have a timing. The only Terran timing now is the 11/11.
That is why you also have other units beside ravens. And I said it is smaller issue, not that it is not the issue. Point was that just rolling back the old ghost won't solve this.
As long as Rain can roll DRG like that in the finals i see no issue with PvZ .
On November 11 2012 17:05 scarper65 wrote: I still don't understand why blizzard nerfed ghosts while leaving infestors untouched. Just bring the old ghosts back and there wouldn't be any problems.
TvZ is actually the smaller issue. Terrans at least have ravens so there is a potential late game in TvZ that can be attempted with reasonable success rates. PvZ is one big all-in fest, because no Protoss will go into late game willingly.
Ravens against infestors? It is pretty much the same as mothership. You pray that they don't get fungaled.
And Protoss actually have a timing. The only Terran timing now is the 11/11.
That is why you also have other units beside ravens. And I said it is smaller issue, not that it is not the issue. Point was that just rolling back the old ghost won't solve this.
As long as Rain can roll DRG like that in the finals i see no issue with PvZ .
Really? Now how many late game Zerg armies have heavy ling and how many TvZs do you see a baneling past the 15 minute mark? And to answer any X unit counters ghosts argument, if you lose your ghosts like that you aren't controlling right. Don't have all your ghosts on 1 hotkey and walk them out into death grab 2 send them forward or even better do what some protoss players do with storm and flank with them from the side im sure most Zergs wouldn't expect that at all.
On November 11 2012 16:17 Aelonius wrote: Miya hit the nail on the head.
As a zerg player, I agree that infestors have the potential to be too strong. However it's two ways. I never see terrans getting ghosts anymore to deal with them.
Also what Miya said, I agree on. We can't play without the infestor as when we do, the chance of us losing to a lot of positional stuff is big. Example: Mass marine vs speedbanes when they split well. Doesn't work without fungal. Blink vs Roach/Ling, same story. So unless this is changed and we become less dependent on fungal/IT, we will remain needing it.
Like I said in my post I heavily disagree with this sentiment, having seen zergs play and win quite well over the past two years and in current tournaments using no infestors whatsoever.
The reason terran doesn't often get ghosts vs infestors + Show Spoiler +
which I don't think is actually correct but I have no proof one way or another regarding that.
is due to the absolutely massive size of infestors making EMP relatively useless since you won't hit more than one or two per emp. Snipe is equally useless as the ghosts get fungaled or killed trying to get close enough to snipe an infestor being properly controlled by a zerg.
Finally in the case of your two examples, a good flank with speedlings in a marine vs bane battle will cause the zerg to win quite cost effectively. If the zerg doesn't spend the apm and micro to set up a flank or a similar maneuver then the terran who had the apm and micro to split well should win that battle. What you're advocating in that example is that the zerg shouldn't be required to micro as well as the terran.
In your roach/ling vs blink it's basically the same story you're right. A good zerg player should surround the stalkers with lings and move right into them with roaches, once again if you do that you'll win quite cost effectively. If forcefields are in the mix, yes it's slightly different. In that instance you'll need to either have burrow for your roaches or bait forcefields and flank properly. Once again, whoever micros comes out ahead, assuming equal macro from both players.
That's one of the big issues many people have with the infestor, it actually totally nullifies things like marine splits, blink micro, etc. Meaning zerg can simply F click and A move their army into the fungaled units It's very one sided.
Even forcefields, which I agree aren't perfect, allow you to bait them and win using flanks, massive units, burrow micro, or targetfiring sentries with small packs of units. Such as 3-4 roaches in zerg's case.
I would like to make a long rant about this in response but I'll make it short.
1. Yes, I am supposed to make decent flanks but even then it'll be a hard one because not all the maps allow for effective flanking if the enemy sets up a good tankline as terran. It's much less cost efficient than what a T has to invest, even with micro from both sides.
2. Forcefields, do not get me started on those. The amount of bullocks that spawns from that ability is astounding. As a protoss, all you need/want is those chokes and small surface area's, so most maps are really annoying to engage. Why do you think it's nearly unstoppable to do a Parting Immortal all-in? There's a very good reason and units like the infestors are needed for that kind of situation.
As I said, Infestors are too strong, but only can be changed if the rest of Zerg's balance is adapted aswell. Sure, there are people who win without them, but most of those matches the other side got completely outplayed before that moment even happened.
Edit: I'd like to put this video in as support and let it speak for itself.
To counter-point these in order: 1. All maps do infact allow for good flanks, assuming you have proper map vision which as zerg you should have due to creep spread, overlord placement, ling placement, watchtower control, etc. You also have the option to use mutalisks to snipe tanks while drawing the terran elsewhere with lings or brood lords in the late game to force an unsiege. A good ling flank will actually create a massive headache for any terran regardless thanks to tanks ability to damage terran's own troops.
2. You haven't actually made a good counterargument against forcefields, however I even said in my previous post I think they're currently not great either. Just not anywhere close to as strong as infestors. However again, good flanks and forcefield bating, or even catching a protoss out in the open(with that map vision you should have naturally as zerg.) Will really help wreck a protoss relying on forcefields.
Amusingly, the parting immortal all-in you cite as being strong because of forcefields is actually primarily countered either by muta builds, a good flank and/or catching the protoss as he moves out, or just careful defense with lings roaches and spines while delaying as long as possible. Infestors are known to be one of the less optimal builds to deal with this allin.
3. The video you've posted consists mostly of games that are a year old or older, and shows things such as a zerg running small numbers of unsupported banes basically on A-move into very well microed marines. So I don't know what you hope to prove from that. =/
On November 11 2012 17:05 scarper65 wrote: I still don't understand why blizzard nerfed ghosts while leaving infestors untouched. Just bring the old ghosts back and there wouldn't be any problems.
TvZ is actually the smaller issue. Terrans at least have ravens so there is a potential late game in TvZ that can be attempted with reasonable success rates. PvZ is one big all-in fest, because no Protoss will go into late game willingly.
Ravens against infestors? It is pretty much the same as mothership. You pray that they don't get fungaled.
And Protoss actually have a timing. The only Terran timing now is the 11/11.
That is why you also have other units beside ravens. And I said it is smaller issue, not that it is not the issue. Point was that just rolling back the old ghost won't solve this.
How is it a smaller issue? Do you think terrans willing go late game vs Zerg? TvZ win rate was worse than PvZ in Code S. Ro16 just looked better for Terran since there was more terrans to begin with.
On November 11 2012 17:05 scarper65 wrote: I still don't understand why blizzard nerfed ghosts while leaving infestors untouched. Just bring the old ghosts back and there wouldn't be any problems.
TvZ is actually the smaller issue. Terrans at least have ravens so there is a potential late game in TvZ that can be attempted with reasonable success rates. PvZ is one big all-in fest, because no Protoss will go into late game willingly.
Next question. I want to know what you are thinking of the current metagame in Starcraft 2.
I was once called the 'Great Detective', but only because there weren't many strategies at that time. I could see what strategy the opponent would do only by looking at his unit count. Nowadays a lot of matches have been played out and many interesting and unusual builds and strategies have came out, which makes it more difficult to predict. Although better mechanics are also important, I think Zerg's Broodlord and Infestor army is too strong. I don't know about ZvT, but in some maps they are way too strong in ZvP. Daybreak is a good example. Even though I am a big whiner for Zerg, I honestly think this composition is imbalanced. Solutions for this strategy should come out pretty soon though.
On November 11 2012 17:05 scarper65 wrote: I still don't understand why blizzard nerfed ghosts while leaving infestors untouched. Just bring the old ghosts back and there wouldn't be any problems.
TvZ is actually the smaller issue. Terrans at least have ravens so there is a potential late game in TvZ that can be attempted with reasonable success rates. PvZ is one big all-in fest, because no Protoss will go into late game willingly.
lol bullshit, TvZ is definitely worse.
TvZ 8-23 code S PvZ 5-10
No comment one way or another regarding which is worse, however all those rates show is that there were: 1. less PvZ played in code S than TvZ. 2. that protoss won more games relative to terran vs zerg. If protoss won all 5 of those games with immortal/sentry allins for example, that would actually prove his point of PvZ being one big "all-in fest" quite nicely.
What I don't agree with however is that TvZ is a smaller issue. I think both matchups are quite flawed right now and ravens having potential late game is quite inaccurate due to the massive amount of gas and bases needed to acquire enough ravens to beat a brood/infestor deathball relative to how many it takes to build up that same brood/infestor deathball.
On November 11 2012 16:17 Aelonius wrote: Miya hit the nail on the head.
As a zerg player, I agree that infestors have the potential to be too strong. However it's two ways. I never see terrans getting ghosts anymore to deal with them.
Also what Miya said, I agree on. We can't play without the infestor as when we do, the chance of us losing to a lot of positional stuff is big. Example: Mass marine vs speedbanes when they split well. Doesn't work without fungal. Blink vs Roach/Ling, same story. So unless this is changed and we become less dependent on fungal/IT, we will remain needing it.
Like I said in my post I heavily disagree with this sentiment, having seen zergs play and win quite well over the past two years and in current tournaments using no infestors whatsoever.
The reason terran doesn't often get ghosts vs infestors + Show Spoiler +
which I don't think is actually correct but I have no proof one way or another regarding that.
is due to the absolutely massive size of infestors making EMP relatively useless since you won't hit more than one or two per emp. Snipe is equally useless as the ghosts get fungaled or killed trying to get close enough to snipe an infestor being properly controlled by a zerg.
Finally in the case of your two examples, a good flank with speedlings in a marine vs bane battle will cause the zerg to win quite cost effectively. If the zerg doesn't spend the apm and micro to set up a flank or a similar maneuver then the terran who had the apm and micro to split well should win that battle. What you're advocating in that example is that the zerg shouldn't be required to micro as well as the terran.
In your roach/ling vs blink it's basically the same story you're right. A good zerg player should surround the stalkers with lings and move right into them with roaches, once again if you do that you'll win quite cost effectively. If forcefields are in the mix, yes it's slightly different. In that instance you'll need to either have burrow for your roaches or bait forcefields and flank properly. Once again, whoever micros comes out ahead, assuming equal macro from both players.
That's one of the big issues many people have with the infestor, it actually totally nullifies things like marine splits, blink micro, etc. Meaning zerg can simply F click and A move their army into the fungaled units It's very one sided.
Even forcefields, which I agree aren't perfect, allow you to bait them and win using flanks, massive units, burrow micro, or targetfiring sentries with small packs of units. Such as 3-4 roaches in zerg's case.
I would like to make a long rant about this in response but I'll make it short.
1. Yes, I am supposed to make decent flanks but even then it'll be a hard one because not all the maps allow for effective flanking if the enemy sets up a good tankline as terran. It's much less cost efficient than what a T has to invest, even with micro from both sides.
2. Forcefields, do not get me started on those. The amount of bullocks that spawns from that ability is astounding. As a protoss, all you need/want is those chokes and small surface area's, so most maps are really annoying to engage. Why do you think it's nearly unstoppable to do a Parting Immortal all-in? There's a very good reason and units like the infestors are needed for that kind of situation.
As I said, Infestors are too strong, but only can be changed if the rest of Zerg's balance is adapted aswell. Sure, there are people who win without them, but most of those matches the other side got completely outplayed before that moment even happened.
To counter-point these in order: 1. All maps do infact allow for good flanks, assuming you have proper map vision which as zerg you should have due to creep spread, overlord placement, ling placement, watchtower control, etc. You also have the option to use mutalisks to snipe tanks while drawing the terran elsewhere with lings or brood lords in the late game to force an unsiege. A good ling flank will actually create a massive headache for any terran regardless thanks to tanks ability to damage terran's own troops.
2. You haven't actually made a good counterargument against forcefields, however I even said in my previous post I think they're currently not great either. Just not anywhere close to as strong as infestors. However again, good flanks and forcefield bating, or even catching a protoss out in the open(with that map vision you should have naturally as zerg.) Will really help wreck a protoss relying on forcefields.
Amusingly, the parting immortal all-in you cite as being strong because of forcefields is actually primarily countered either by muta builds, a good flank and/or catching the protoss as he moves out, or just careful defense with lings roaches and spines while delaying as long as possible. Infestors are known to be one of the less optimal builds to deal with this allin.
3. The video you've posted consists mostly of games that are a year old or older, and shows things such as a zerg running small numbers of unsupported banes basically on A-move into very well microed marines. So I don't know what you hope to prove from that. =/
You just made my point very much yourself, thank you. Let me dissect it for a moment:
1. Zerg using relatively small numbers So I am forced to make an army with big numbers to deal with a single drop of 8 marines efficiently? If he drops 8 marines and makes 4-5 banelings not connect but die then that's already a win for the terran, provided he doesn't lose his medivac, in the economic aspect.
2. Unsupported banes My point exactly, without support of say an infestor, they are even more cost inefficient against good players and basicly become useless if you aren't lucky enough for them to mess up.
Really? Now how many late game Zerg armies have heavy ling and how many TvZs do you see a baneling past the 15 minute mark? And to answer any X unit counters ghosts argument, if you lose your ghosts like that you aren't controlling right. Don't have all your ghosts on 1 hotkey and walk them out into death grab 2 send them forward or even better do what some protoss players do with storm and flank with them from the side im sure most Zergs wouldn't expect that at all.
Yeah, that is because the Zerg players weren't creative and smart enough to make the units that countered ghosts. They would have owned Mvp if they only just tried to make lings and surround the ghosts. If they did that, they would have won more GSLs.
Flanking a deathball which has units which auto attack when you get in range?
Next question. I want to know what you are thinking of the current metagame in Starcraft 2.
I was once called the 'Great Detective', but only because there weren't many strategies at that time. I could see what strategy the opponent would do only by looking at his unit count. Nowadays a lot of matches have been played out and many interesting and unusual builds and strategies have came out, which makes it more difficult to predict. Although better mechanics are also important, I think Zerg's Broodlord and Infestor army is too strong. I don't know about ZvT, but in some maps they are way too strong in ZvP. Daybreak is a good example. Even though I am a big whiner for Zerg, I honestly think this composition is imbalanced. Solutions for this strategy should come out pretty soon though.
On November 11 2012 16:17 Aelonius wrote: Miya hit the nail on the head.
As a zerg player, I agree that infestors have the potential to be too strong. However it's two ways. I never see terrans getting ghosts anymore to deal with them.
Also what Miya said, I agree on. We can't play without the infestor as when we do, the chance of us losing to a lot of positional stuff is big. Example: Mass marine vs speedbanes when they split well. Doesn't work without fungal. Blink vs Roach/Ling, same story. So unless this is changed and we become less dependent on fungal/IT, we will remain needing it.
Like I said in my post I heavily disagree with this sentiment, having seen zergs play and win quite well over the past two years and in current tournaments using no infestors whatsoever.
The reason terran doesn't often get ghosts vs infestors + Show Spoiler +
which I don't think is actually correct but I have no proof one way or another regarding that.
is due to the absolutely massive size of infestors making EMP relatively useless since you won't hit more than one or two per emp. Snipe is equally useless as the ghosts get fungaled or killed trying to get close enough to snipe an infestor being properly controlled by a zerg.
Finally in the case of your two examples, a good flank with speedlings in a marine vs bane battle will cause the zerg to win quite cost effectively. If the zerg doesn't spend the apm and micro to set up a flank or a similar maneuver then the terran who had the apm and micro to split well should win that battle. What you're advocating in that example is that the zerg shouldn't be required to micro as well as the terran.
In your roach/ling vs blink it's basically the same story you're right. A good zerg player should surround the stalkers with lings and move right into them with roaches, once again if you do that you'll win quite cost effectively. If forcefields are in the mix, yes it's slightly different. In that instance you'll need to either have burrow for your roaches or bait forcefields and flank properly. Once again, whoever micros comes out ahead, assuming equal macro from both players.
That's one of the big issues many people have with the infestor, it actually totally nullifies things like marine splits, blink micro, etc. Meaning zerg can simply F click and A move their army into the fungaled units It's very one sided.
Even forcefields, which I agree aren't perfect, allow you to bait them and win using flanks, massive units, burrow micro, or targetfiring sentries with small packs of units. Such as 3-4 roaches in zerg's case.
I would like to make a long rant about this in response but I'll make it short.
1. Yes, I am supposed to make decent flanks but even then it'll be a hard one because not all the maps allow for effective flanking if the enemy sets up a good tankline as terran. It's much less cost efficient than what a T has to invest, even with micro from both sides.
2. Forcefields, do not get me started on those. The amount of bullocks that spawns from that ability is astounding. As a protoss, all you need/want is those chokes and small surface area's, so most maps are really annoying to engage. Why do you think it's nearly unstoppable to do a Parting Immortal all-in? There's a very good reason and units like the infestors are needed for that kind of situation.
As I said, Infestors are too strong, but only can be changed if the rest of Zerg's balance is adapted aswell. Sure, there are people who win without them, but most of those matches the other side got completely outplayed before that moment even happened.
To counter-point these in order: 1. All maps do infact allow for good flanks, assuming you have proper map vision which as zerg you should have due to creep spread, overlord placement, ling placement, watchtower control, etc. You also have the option to use mutalisks to snipe tanks while drawing the terran elsewhere with lings or brood lords in the late game to force an unsiege. A good ling flank will actually create a massive headache for any terran regardless thanks to tanks ability to damage terran's own troops.
2. You haven't actually made a good counterargument against forcefields, however I even said in my previous post I think they're currently not great either. Just not anywhere close to as strong as infestors. However again, good flanks and forcefield bating, or even catching a protoss out in the open(with that map vision you should have naturally as zerg.) Will really help wreck a protoss relying on forcefields.
Amusingly, the parting immortal all-in you cite as being strong because of forcefields is actually primarily countered either by muta builds, a good flank and/or catching the protoss as he moves out, or just careful defense with lings roaches and spines while delaying as long as possible. Infestors are known to be one of the less optimal builds to deal with this allin.
3. The video you've posted consists mostly of games that are a year old or older, and shows things such as a zerg running small numbers of unsupported banes basically on A-move into very well microed marines. So I don't know what you hope to prove from that. =/
You just made my point very much yourself, thank you. Let me dissect it for a moment:
1. Zerg using relatively small numbers So I am forced to make an army with big numbers to deal with a single drop of 8 marines efficiently? If he drops 8 marines and makes 4-5 banelings not connect but die then that's already a win for the terran, provided he doesn't lose his medivac, in the economic aspect.
2. Unsupported banes My point exactly, without support of say an infestor, they are even more cost inefficient against good players and basicly become useless if you aren't lucky enough for them to mess up.
Against drops you should have spores and spines late game, much like protoss uses cannons and terran turrets. Earlier on at least part of your army should be available to defend the drop, again much like terran has vikings and/or marines to deter and protoss leaves 6 stalkers at home for this.
"Unsupported banes" as in: the banes in the video, which again the games are a minumum of a YEAR old(two in the case of the Kyrix games), had no zergling support. If you have speedlings to surround marines or flank it doesn't much matter how well they split, you'll still clean up everything that's not a 200 supply army.(for which you should have either brood lords, ultras with bane/ling support, or at least a good bane/ling/muta composition for)
On November 11 2012 17:05 scarper65 wrote: I still don't understand why blizzard nerfed ghosts while leaving infestors untouched. Just bring the old ghosts back and there wouldn't be any problems.
TvZ is actually the smaller issue. Terrans at least have ravens so there is a potential late game in TvZ that can be attempted with reasonable success rates. PvZ is one big all-in fest, because no Protoss will go into late game willingly.
lol bullshit, TvZ is definitely worse.
TvZ 8-23 code S PvZ 5-10
No comment one way or another regarding which is worse, however all those rates show is that there were: 1. less PvZ played in code S than TvZ. 2. that protoss won more games relative to terran vs zerg. If protoss won all 5 of those games with immortal/sentry allins for example, that would actually prove his point of PvZ being one big "all-in fest" quite nicely.
What I don't agree with however is that TvZ is a smaller issue. I think both matchups are quite flawed right now and ravens having potential late game is quite inaccurate due to the massive amount of gas and bases needed to acquire enough ravens to beat a brood/infestor deathball relative to how many it takes to build up that same brood/infestor deathball.
Yeah for sure, I just get really annoyed when people claim PvZ is more of an issue.
Those 8 terran wins were mostly 2rax or the zerg fucking up (e.g. RorO leaving 6 ultras + the rest of his army in his nydus.)
Protoss at least has a viable allin (unbeatable, according to the creator of the build), terran only has 11/11 which isn't nearly as succesful. Then in the lategame protoss has a hero unit that can help them win the engagement. Not to mention they can beat zerg before lategame anyway (Rain 4-1 DRG OSL)
Terran has nothing vs the zerg lategame, we have to hope for zerg mistakes.
And now some clueless people will quote and say raven/ghost, sigh.
EPT
