|
United Kingdom12041 Posts
On September 15 2017 14:11 tomatriedes wrote:
The game was more balanced before mech switch became so popular and perfected. Rather than nerfing terran units I would like to see a small energy buff to queens to make them more efficient.
Watch Larva and ZerO man. Queens are plenty efficient already. One reason this is is watch Flash's video on the mech switch where he says you basically want only tanks. This means queens have no counter in the terran army for the most part.
|
True, TvZ mech push without Vessel is idiotic, and comsat nerf wont affect it much at all, but comsat nerf to TvP is suicidal without max scan. How about reduce area or duration of reveal? Problem with scan ZvT is that it allows T to transition late mech effectively after knowing about game situation (tech switches, army position, situations in key strategic areas, etc). In effect, scan ushers 3-3 mech push because T knows everything he needs to know about Z, and at the same time can nullify any threat Z has against mech T - lurkers, defiler, flanking units in the dark.
|
On September 15 2017 15:37 Qikz wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2017 14:11 tomatriedes wrote:
The game was more balanced before mech switch became so popular and perfected. Rather than nerfing terran units I would like to see a small energy buff to queens to make them more efficient. Watch Larva and ZerO man. Queens are plenty efficient already. One reason this is is watch Flash's video on the mech switch where he says you basically want only tanks. This means queens have no counter in the terran army for the most part.
Only partially true. Late BW Golden Era (my unofficial categorization) 2010s where NSK and Zero were tinkering with queens ZvT and even ZvZ(!) was the most exciting period in all of BW. Ensnare on mutalisks, on bio, key tank snipes with broodlings were all fun to play and fun to watch. But that got figured out pretty quickly, at least in TvZ.
Terrans just learned to turret with more reckless abandon. Watch one of the last games between Flash and Zero where Zero's 6+ queens where rendered useless due to spammed turrets all over the map, and were later easily removed by Irradiate and a Valk. Soon, Light, Fantasy, and even motherfucking Leta were copying it.
I mean queens are nice, and theoretically should be sound countered to lategame T, but the come so late and need so much energy, and are paperthin that if you add them to an already micro and hotkey-intensive zerg army, you would need an additional finger on each hand, an 100+ increase in apm, AND a nerf of queens' spell energy.
|
On September 15 2017 04:26 Sero wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2017 23:38 _Animus_ wrote:
That 60 hp scvs always give unfair advantage to terran in rushes, not only in defensive perspective. The easiest way for a terran to win a game in 1 min is bunker rush and that often happens. I would like to see a percentage statistic with wins gained by scv or bunker rush. Or how easy is to hold hydra rush when 12 shots kill 1 scv? 45 or 50 hp wouldve been just fine. SCV health obviously helps in rushes, but in what way is it unfair? Are you losing lots of games to bunker rush in PVT? It can be defended easily even with 12 nexus. This is like me complaining that zealots having more health than marines is an "unfair advantage to Protoss in rushes."
Well in pvz and pvt ive seen alot of pro players lose to bunker rush. Also its the only worker that takes 2 dt shots to be killed and have the magical ability to run thru storm and not die, which is a kinda unfair.
|
On September 15 2017 14:11 tomatriedes wrote:
The game was more balanced before mech switch became so popular and perfected. Rather than nerfing terran units I would like to see a small energy buff to queens to make them more efficient.
What you could do is make ensnared units cast animations take a lot longer. That would be a buff to ensnaring m&m, but will leave just about everything the same.
|
On September 15 2017 16:44 iopq wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2017 14:11 tomatriedes wrote:
The game was more balanced before mech switch became so popular and perfected. Rather than nerfing terran units I would like to see a small energy buff to queens to make them more efficient. What you could do is make ensnared units cast animations take a lot longer. That would be a buff to ensnaring m&m, but will leave just about everything the same.
This is a nice suggestion. And imagine all the ZVZ muta+q vs.muta+q ensnare dodge
|
Hey TT1 what do you think about the fact Terran supposedly takes quite a bit more APM than Zerg? Is that a proof that Terran takes more skill than Zerg. I saw your post about Zerg being harder in your opinion because it is harder to macro larva and you have too many units for hotkeys. I think it is a good interesting discussion. But maps are probably the answer to inherent T>Z by 5% and Z>P by 10%.
|
For the TvZ and TvP matchup I would suggest:
a slight buff to drones and probes (+5hp), tired of well executed bunker rushes and vultures killing super effectively
a slight buff to queen hp, that an irradiate would only bring it to minimal health. This would make queens cost efficient against turrets/irradiates and enable the zerg army to better duke out with 4-5 valkyries
I love BW, but I would really like to see top zergs and protosses do better
|
On September 16 2017 09:12 Alpha-NP- wrote:
Hey TT1 what do you think about the fact Terran supposedly takes quite a bit more APM than Zerg? Is that a proof that Terran takes more skill than Zerg. I saw your post about Zerg being harder in your opinion because it is harder to macro larva and you have too many units for hotkeys. I think it is a good interesting discussion. But maps are probably the answer to inherent T>Z by 5% and Z>P by 10%.
Terran requires more APM? According to who? Zerg usually has more EAPM than the other races because they move their units around the map the most (it's also harder to macro properly with Z). EffOrt is probably the fastest progamer atm. Typically T/Z have more apm than P but it varies from player to player (i.e: Bisu etc.).
|
I was C-/C Terran on ICC.
I think I've never been beaten by a Terran with <100 apm.
I have, on the other hand, been murdered by some Zergs with <100 apm.
I think you can hardly get to D+ with <100 apm as Terran, while you can get to C- or C with Zerg, and like B- with toss lol.
just my opinion tho, and of course, even if it were to be true, it doesn't say much about higher levels of competition.
On September 16 2017 09:26 TT1 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2017 09:12 Alpha-NP- wrote:
Hey TT1 what do you think about the fact Terran supposedly takes quite a bit more APM than Zerg? Is that a proof that Terran takes more skill than Zerg. I saw your post about Zerg being harder in your opinion because it is harder to macro larva and you have too many units for hotkeys. I think it is a good interesting discussion. But maps are probably the answer to inherent T>Z by 5% and Z>P by 10%. Terran requires more APM? According to who? Zerg usually has more EAPM than the other races because they move their units around the map the most (it's also harder to macro properly with Z). EffOrt is probably the fastest progamer atm. Typically T/Z have more apm than P but it varies from player to player (i.e: Bisu etc.).
Zergs' macro is forgiving. You can fail to macro for up to 3 larvas and not lose anything of armysize. You can only get into timing dangers.
with terrans, if you fail to macro for the duration of 2 buildcycles of a tank, those 2 tanks cannot be made up for, ever.
|
skill goes beyond how much apm is required to have good mechanics with a race because there is also a lot of decision making involved, its not necessarily more complicated because you do more actions, it can be more mechanical but easier to decide. Also sometimes its an issue of checking some stuff constantly to be ready to jump back or forth or just react rly quickly that makes you want to get more apm. Imo thats why P is typically less apm intensive but takes just as much skill to play, thats how i see it anyway.
I mean theres mechanical skills and there are decision making skills
B- with P with <100apm, sounds real tough though ^^
|
On September 16 2017 09:36 niteReloaded wrote:I was C-/C Terran on ICC. I think I've never been beaten by a Terran with <100 apm. I have, on the other hand, been murdered by some Zergs with <100 apm. I think you can hardly get to D+ with <100 apm as Terran, while you can get to C- or C with Zerg, and like B- with toss lol. just my opinion tho, and of course, even if it were to be true, it doesn't say much about higher levels of competition. Show nested quote +On September 16 2017 09:26 TT1 wrote:On September 16 2017 09:12 Alpha-NP- wrote:
Hey TT1 what do you think about the fact Terran supposedly takes quite a bit more APM than Zerg? Is that a proof that Terran takes more skill than Zerg. I saw your post about Zerg being harder in your opinion because it is harder to macro larva and you have too many units for hotkeys. I think it is a good interesting discussion. But maps are probably the answer to inherent T>Z by 5% and Z>P by 10%. Terran requires more APM? According to who? Zerg usually has more EAPM than the other races because they move their units around the map the most (it's also harder to macro properly with Z). EffOrt is probably the fastest progamer atm. Typically T/Z have more apm than P but it varies from player to player (i.e: Bisu etc.). Zergs' macro is forgiving. You can fail to macro for up to 3 larvas and not lose anything of armysize. You can only get into timing dangers. with terrans, if you fail to macro for the duration of 2 buildcycles of a tank, those 2 tanks cannot be made up for, ever.
Zerg's macro is harder compared to the other races because T/P have all their production facilities in 1 spot, whereas Zerg has them spread out all over the map. You need to f key and hotkey production facilities way more than the other races.
Terran and Toss can hotkey 1 of their gates or facts, double tap that key then cycle through all their production facilities to macro. Zerg can't do that, they need to hotkey multiple hatcheries (the high lvl Z's hotkey ~6 hatcheries separately) on top of having to manage way more units than the other races.
|
I think deciding what to produce with the larvas with Z is way tough to decide too so that makes their macro harder in a non mechanical way too^^ it just feels like there are a lot of possibilities that can be good or bad and have significant impact on the game for each larva used :O and every building you make in essence costs a larva^^ that you can plan on.. supply, drone, or a unit of different cost and stength..
even waiting for a bunch of larvas to delay making a decision :O
|
On September 16 2017 09:36 niteReloaded wrote:
I was C-/C Terran on ICC.
I think I've never been beaten by a Terran with <100 apm.
I have, on the other hand, been murdered by some Zergs with <100 apm.
I think you can hardly get to D+ with <100 apm as Terran, while you can get to C- or C with Zerg, and like B- with toss lol.
just my opinion tho, and of course, even if it were to be true, it doesn't say much about higher levels of competition.
Anecdotal. Besides, you lie if you say <100 apm zerg can beat a C/C- terran.
On September 16 2017 09:36 niteReloaded wrote:
Zergs' macro is forgiving. You can fail to macro for up to 3 larvas and not lose anything of armysize. You can only get into timing dangers.
with terrans, if you fail to macro for the duration of 2 buildcycles of a tank, those 2 tanks cannot be made up for, ever.
Zerg macro is more unforgiving than Terran and Protoss. From your statements, I think you don't know zerg at all. Zerg macro is all about timing. Correctly use a larva now, then you have a larva for the next timing cycle. Miss a larva now and you miss the next cycle. For P and T, miss it now and it only means that it is delayed in entering the game. For Zerg, it's literally one unit that will never be if you miss the timing.
I could explain this further if it is still not clear to you.
|
On September 16 2017 09:26 TT1 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2017 09:12 Alpha-NP- wrote:
Hey TT1 what do you think about the fact Terran supposedly takes quite a bit more APM than Zerg? Is that a proof that Terran takes more skill than Zerg. I saw your post about Zerg being harder in your opinion because it is harder to macro larva and you have too many units for hotkeys. I think it is a good interesting discussion. But maps are probably the answer to inherent T>Z by 5% and Z>P by 10%. Terran requires more APM? According to who? Zerg usually has more EAPM than the other races because they move their units around the map the most (it's also harder to macro properly with Z). EffOrt is probably the fastest progamer atm. Typically T/Z have more apm than P but it varies from player to player (i.e: Bisu etc.).
It comes from an old thread that may be outdated. But the conclusion was that Terran took more apm and multitasking than Zerg. I'd like to come to a definite conclusion. But your the expert not me.
|
I don't know if you can directly compare the APM of Terran and Zerg. Even with EAPM, it leaves out a lot. For example, you can easily get EAPM over 1000 by just spamming hotkeys and control groups- it doesn't *do* anything, but it's "effective".
I think Terran has more of the fiddly mouse micro (click scv, click to repair, click building to liftoff, click tank to siege, click vulture to lay mine, etc) while zerg is more about zooming around the map with lots of control groups. Not that Terran doesn't use control groups, or zerg doesn't have fiddly mouse stuff, but it's just more with each. That would explain the general consensus that Terran requires the most mechanics/hand speed, but Zerg players often have the highest EAPM.
|
I have a theory that the high number of Terran bonjwas is influenced by the mirrors. A Terran who excels in TvT is likely to do well in the other match-ups but ZvZ is almost like a completely different game than ZvT or ZvP. To be a dominant Zerg you have to posses a greater variety of disparate skills than a Terran or a Protoss. This is part of what makes Jaedong such a treasure. I feel that if ZvZ played out a little more like ZvT and ZvP we would have seen a higher number of Zerg Bonjwas.
|
On September 16 2017 13:16 DepressionSC wrote:
I have a theory that the high number of Terran bonjwas is influenced by the mirrors. A Terran who excels in TvT is likely to do well in the other match-ups but ZvZ is almost like a completely different game than ZvT or ZvP. To be a dominant Zerg you have to posses a greater variety of disparate skills than a Terran or a Protoss. This is part of what makes Jaedong such a treasure. I feel that if ZvZ played out a little more like ZvT and ZvP we would have seen a higher number of Zerg Bonjwas.
Perhaps there's an element of truth to this. Zerg-versus-zerg is so micro-management-centric that it actually is more beneficial to use your arrow keys to maneuver the screen around, because it leads to more precise micro-management, a trait that was seen in a lot of micro-management-centric players such as BoxeR or Crazy-Hydra. This particular trait would be more of a hindrance in more macro-management-focused match-ups.
It's a good thing Jaedong managed a way to master zerg-versus-zerg even without that particular trait, but I personally believe that he could have been trained into an unstoppable (not a figure of speech, but literally unstoppable) zerg-versus-zerg machine if his team really wanted to develop Jaedong as a pure zerg-verus-zerg sniper.
|
On September 15 2017 15:37 Qikz wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2017 14:11 tomatriedes wrote:
The game was more balanced before mech switch became so popular and perfected. Rather than nerfing terran units I would like to see a small energy buff to queens to make them more efficient. Watch Larva and ZerO man. Queens are plenty efficient already. One reason this is is watch Flash's video on the mech switch where he says you basically want only tanks. This means queens have no counter in the terran army for the most part.
I never said queens are of no use, just that tweaking them would help with balance.
|
On September 16 2017 14:00 tomatriedes wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2017 15:37 Qikz wrote:On September 15 2017 14:11 tomatriedes wrote:
The game was more balanced before mech switch became so popular and perfected. Rather than nerfing terran units I would like to see a small energy buff to queens to make them more efficient. Watch Larva and ZerO man. Queens are plenty efficient already. One reason this is is watch Flash's video on the mech switch where he says you basically want only tanks. This means queens have no counter in the terran army for the most part. I never said queens are of no use, just that tweaking them would help with balance.
Would be nice if mass queen broodlings were useful for us regular folks, instead of being so difficult that only top pros could use them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
