| Forum Index > Closed |
|
F13
United States38 Posts
On November 24 2008 16:56 CDRdude wrote: I have one question: Why are you disagreeing with yourself? Its not disagreeing, I'm recommending that they have queens ready INCASE the terran player makes a mistake by letting his CC get injured (and you being prepared to take advantage of his mistake) | ||
alffla
Hong Kong20321 Posts
check saviro vs flash on blue storm out 2 hatch mmuta into guardian rapes flash for like 10 mins out of 15 mins of the game? flash loses cc once too IIRC but then he still manages to win in the end so i wouldn't say CCs are winning or losing factors? ~_~ | ||
|
CDRdude
United States5625 Posts
On November 24 2008 17:02 F13 wrote: ... you're a freaking D player with lower apm than me, what do you expect? ... Thanks. Dude, are you trying to get banned? Posting this thread in the strategy forum, Chill's forum, and then saying crap like this. You're theorycrafting, he's theorycrafting, which has very little to do with iCCup rank. | ||
|
Misrah
United States1695 Posts
On November 24 2008 17:02 F13 wrote: Of course you've been in many games where T forgets to lift, you're a freaking D player with lower apm than me, what do you expect? Yes, I saw your replays on your 'zerg on coke' thread. I'm talking about the Progaming scene, please read my post ENTIRELY before you quote my long post and throw in two stupid lines which I've already explained in the post. And even in pro scenes, there are times when Terran forgets to lift. But that is Terran's own fault for doing so, its his negligance. He is given the full possibility to let his CC stay unharmed through his actions. However, the Zerg does not have a choice whether he is reactive or not. I'm saying that Terran HAS the power to let his cc not become damaged enough for queen to kick in, I'm not arguing whether he will or not. Thanks. Ahh (well about the replays, that is what i look like after not playing SC for 2+ weeks because of computer problems.) If you wish i can send you a few games i have played tonight, with a week or two of practice, to try and get back in form. (just let me know) However i digress- You have just admitted that terrans at the pro scene do forget to lift. Do you know why? APM constraints. Technically, if APM was unlimited, terran would be the best race to play. If you could micro like a god, and macro every single unit- you would be unstoppable. Sadly this is not possible with human hands. So, once again- a choice is made. Lift the CC or do something else? So once again, its a choice- with consequences. I don't understand where this huge imbalance comes into play? If you really really hate CC's that much, get some scourge. /thread | ||
|
Februarys
Korea (South)259 Posts
To OP: I think cost effectiveness factors in a lot more than you think, especially when Terran can compete with a 2 base Z with only 1 base | ||
|
EGLzGaMeR
United States1867 Posts
| ||
|
ketomai
United States2789 Posts
On November 24 2008 16:32 F13 wrote: Great feedback, (I also appreciate your youtube account uploading videos!) There are some things I have to argue about: I think Terrans commit alot less to defend than Zergs will. Each sunken = 175 minerals. 1 bunker = 100 minerals. A few sunkens will not stop a decent sized m&m army while 2 bunkers + a tank WILL stop a decent sized lurker/ling army. To further talk about this issue, because Zergs need to have more expansions than Terrans do, its only natural that Terrans have fewer expansions, which equals less units spent to defend because there are less expansions. Dark swarm can hold off a m&m army IF Zerg has enough ground support units, and Vessel will simply irradiate the defiler anyway so the length of the dark swarm = how safe Zerg base will be. Furthermore, Dark swarm+ defiler is a not viable until hive, and we know how much more damaging losing a base is in early/mid game than compared to late game. Swarm definately is not greater than lift off. I have already explained that lifting off IS a small thing but it is the root of how the expansions are destroyed/saved. That analogy definately doesnt work. How about you telling me losing expansions and keeping expansions are a small thing in Starcraft? But I appreciate you pointing out possibility I missed. Yes Zerg is more mobile BUT what good is mobility if you can't touch their base/expansion and they can touch your base/expansion? Most of the time, Terrans need all of their units to fight and reinforce because of how strong marines are in large numbers. Your deduction that because Terrans have less expansions that they need fewer units to defend doesn't work out because how often do you see a group of lings waiting at an expansion to defend it all game? It's always the Terran that is forced provide a little more to defend because they don't have the ability to instantly get units from their main to an expansion so easily. Zerg just needs a defiler to stall for the swarm ultra ling army to come back or simply come out of the nydus. As mentioned before, Zerg needs only stall, and dark swarm does that very well. If you are talking about mid game, then Terran usually does not go past his natural during that stage, thus negating any large advantage lifting off has. Usually, if a Terran is forced to lift off his natural, then he's screwed no matter what (or they are trading bases), in which case letting him reland it later when there won't be a later is pointless. The Zerg 3rd expansion mid game is supposed to be the safe expansion. It won't be in any kind of danger until the Terran comes out with his initial push, and by that stage, Zerg losing that expansion most likely means that he also lost his army, which would be the end of the game regardless. I was assuming you meant late-game when there is a need to defend a large number of expansions. I don't think I ever disagreed that expansions are important in starcraft, however, the ability to lift off is not something that makes Terran expansion impenetrable or blatantly biased. It's part of the game. If everything were the same, it wouldn't be starcraft. Each race has advantages and disadvantages that theoretically are supposed to even out. I don't disagree that Terran is slightly favored versus Zerg either, but the root cause isn't because Zerglings can't shoot air and Hatcheries can't lift off. | ||
|
alffla
Hong Kong20321 Posts
On November 24 2008 17:09 Februarys wrote: wow to misrah for being an idiot. How about you stop asking questions thats already been answered? Facepalm to you for bringing up the retarded analogy that talks about the race of the chess players To OP: I think cost effectiveness factors in a lot more than you think, especially when Terran can compete with a 2 base Z with only 1 base wtf he wasn't talking about the race (ethnicity) of the chess players he was talking about the colour of the pieces that they get to use white or black wtf wtf -0- | ||
|
Misrah
United States1695 Posts
On November 24 2008 17:09 Lz wrote: crying about zvt is pointless.. compared to zvp (take note of what race is actually winning everything !! Protoss !!) but zvt is not that hard.. getting to late game is also pritty simple with decent muta micro. I think once u get mutas you can take a 3rd base (if a ramp put 2 lurkers on it) and safe 3rd gas which is all zerg needs to win a zvt 3 gas defiler/ling/lurk. Thankyou. Lz someone understands. F13 there are just too many variables to think about here. A zerg can secure an expo (on a ramp) with 3 lurks and a hand full of lings. NO amount of M&M is going to break that. Then once late game rolls around, swarm and nydus. Basically Z mobility > T mobility. Cracklings have the highest DPS in the game (minus nukes) So sending them to an expo, is well worth having the T lift, run scv's, and his super slow army to go and save it. | ||
|
Februarys
Korea (South)259 Posts
On November 24 2008 17:12 alffla wrote: wtf he wasn't talking about the race (ethnicity) of the chess players he was talking about the colour of the pieces that they get to use white or black wtf wtf -0- lol, I guess I misunderstood. I apologize for thinking it in a different manner I guess it makes more sense now | ||
|
KrAzYfoOL
Australia3037 Posts
| ||
|
randombum
United States2378 Posts
The game on the whole is balanced. I could argue in the same way that 1 lurker makes zerg imbalanced because it can theoretically kill all your opponents units if they don't have detection. If you say they bring detection I will say I kill detection, that is how you are arguing, and all your arguments come out. For example, in your OP, you state that when zerg's lose a hatch they lose mining time which is bad. But when you cc lifts you are magically still mining and it has only cost you 5 seconds in mining time? Or where the zerg rebuilds a hatch but waits for that hatch to finish before making drones from his other hatch to bring over. What is this a D- ranked zerg? You start the post with Macro is very important..yada yada, and later A Terran maintaining a mining base giving him mineral/gas intake is not important. At the pro level terran is simply so overpowered that they don't need to mine from their expansions to win. When you advocate using queens for ensnare, please do not say not to use them for infesting, by your own advice you would have queens anyways. If the terran is elsewhere, say killing one of your expansions, then you bring in your army to attack, he runs scvs and lifts. Oh noes, you have gained nothing (according to you). But since you would have a queen anyways (according to you) then you can ensnare the running scvs and they will all die to lings even with 60 health. Then you bring in your leftover mutas and damage it until your queen can infest. This will not take as long as you think unless you are playing someone infinitly fast, in which case having them lift their cc should already be considered a win. You state the turrents from a undefended lifted CC would kill all your mutas... What exactly are your lings doing since they can't attack a CC? In other arguments, you that 2 bunks and a tank will stop a decent sized zerg army. Fine, you spend 850/100 on defense and I'll take 2 more expos which will let me get to hive tech and get dark swarm giving me an un-killable base for 40 seconds for 50 minerals. This is just a point you would say, but I would counter that terran being more cost effective on defense doesn't make them better, it makes them different. The whole POINT of the terran race is that they have good defense. Since you are big on creating scenarios where your argument comes out on top, let me give you one of mine where the zerg does. Lets say its a standard game, 3 hatch muta vs 1 rax fe Your muta harras has been fairly efficient, you didn't own his scv line, but you picked off a handful of marines and scvs building turrets. His mnm ball moves out for your third after muta harrass is nullified (but you still have 4). Oh no, he has stepped on hold lurkers, you win. Same scenario, but he avoids your lurkers and gets to the third. He will kill it, but you have countered attacked his main, forcing him to lift his cc. Ha, you fool you lost a base and all he lost was a few marines and a bunker guarding his nat. But with the lurkers you had on hold position you put them at his natural so his army can't return to save his base allowing your mutas to kill it as it floats very slowly to his base. You've won again eventually. Or you've 5 pooled, even if he lifts his CC you've won. The point is, constructing a scenario does not work. If you have forced the CC to lift then you have effectively stopped his expansion from mining, bring in your army and you can keep him from landing. Trading 1 zerg base for 1 terran base is generally in the favor of zerg. But what if his army is stronger than yours? Then you lost the game to something else and not the terran lifting his cc. What you need to realize is that lifting a CC does not win you the game, in fact if you have to lift your cc it is a + for the zerg. Its not as hard of a hit as losing the CC, but keep it lifted for a minute and he's lost over 400 minerals of mining time and you can rebuild your hatch already. Yes, lifting a CC and saving it is better than losing a CC,but is lifting a cc and losing your mnm at his base killing his drones and he saves his hatch at 15 life more cost efficient? Comparing two races that are built to be different, but asking they suffer the same consequences of leaving a base undefended is silly. I'm tired and its not typed up very eloquently, but I think I've wasted enough time on your misguided notions of SC or your trolling. I saw your post on youtube for the + Show Spoiler + Jaedong FBH But hey, if 99% of the population tells you you're wrong, just say you'll ignore them and feel good about yourself. It takes a brave man to challenge the world. | ||
OneOther
United States10774 Posts
| ||
Ver
United States2186 Posts
On November 24 2008 16:55 F13 wrote: You need to factor in how modern ZvT has changed throughout the many years. You cannot compare chess to SC, period Threads like these suck, and your analysis isn't deep at all. Matchup balance has always rested on the strategical developments of each race. Before Nada and oov, TvP was an absolute nightmare. From the period of the oov revolution to Gorush, no Zerg had developed the tools necessary to deal with the oov revolution in TvZ (besides July vs oov only). And it wasn't until Savior's uprising before the matchup was firmly put back in the hands of Zerg for over a year. But post Savior, ZvT has lacked innovators. Jaedong has shown one way with 2 hatch muta versus the super fast expansions, but that is only a band-aid, almost an all-in, and has been more than canceled out by the strength of the oov vulture valkyrie build that is always a possibility. Otherwise, Jaedong's ZvT dominance from the late 07 to early/mid 08 has been from his own raw ability, not matchup revolutions, and his sucking right now is also due to his decreasing raw ability since the triple series versus Flash in early 08. If you want to improve ZvT, screw making up worthless rubbish about how lifting cc's makes the matchup imbalanced or equally dumb things like petitioning blizzard. But look at it this way. If iloveoov hadn't come around when he did, ZvT imbalance would've been in the 60's in favor of Zerg because Terran would've had no way to deal with the 3 hatch stacked muta harass that came out. This singlehandedly destroyed the effectiveness of the 1 base build outside of all-ins or gimmicks (sparks rush, Iris vs Savior game 4 HitchHiker vulture vessel rush). But because for whatever reason, Terran has been blessed with the best and smartest innovators (only Savior can compare to Boxer and oov, with rA and Flash not all too far away but clearly a distant 4th/5th). Nada/Jaedong/Bisu are all very similar players, but Nada dominating so much more was simply because he came earlier. All the non-genius Terrans have been so successful because they relied on these innovations that were developed by the brightest Terran minds. Zerg's Savior came late, and rA was never consistent enough and sadly didn't push his matchup revolutions as much as he did his wide variety of gimmicks and surprises. It's just how people said ZvP was so imbalanced just a few years ago. The reality was is that besides rA protoss players were rather dumb and lacking innovation in PvZ (or were like Daezang and didn't have the ability to implement their innovation fully). The PvZ equalization, or superiority even, from 07 onwards, is not the result of a Blizzard patch. It actually wasn't a new strategy either, because rA had been doing forge FE for a long time (with no success against Savior), and dt/sair was only used for a temporary period, and really only super successful because Bisu has had the best mechanics of Protoss ever. But with Bisu's success, forge FE became the standard, nearly the only build to use, and the Protoss energy resurged. Bisu was able to take the innovations of rA and Daezang, add his own slight alterations, and smack Savior and every other Zerg silly with the best set of PvZ mechanics ever. From that point on, there were no more cries of 'ZvP imba' that had flooded the forums to the point where people wanted to ban them all together. This is how you change Starcraft. So if you want to be useful and not just wasting our time, think of something good to transform the matchup. | ||
|
hymn
Bulgaria832 Posts
You're saying "if the terran makes mistake and doesn't lift his cc punish him". I am ok with that. You also say zerg hatcheries are most vulnerable in mid game. I am ok with that too. What you don't say though is that if the zerg makes the mistake to leave his hatchery undefended in mid game he deserves to get punished. All the time I see replays ZvT where the zerg gets his third gas while harassing with mutas. In the mean time he moves two hydralisks to the third gas expansion, morhps them to lurkers and burrows them. No matter if they are on the choke or near the hatchery. Zerg also makes 2-3 sunkens there if there is no choke. So there you have it - impenetrable defense line for the Terran mid game MnM army. For the cost of 2-3 sunkens (around 300 minerals) and 2 lurkers (200 minerals and 250 gas) total of 500 minerals and 250 gas. Terran can make like 8 marines (400 minerals) and a few medics which can only get fucked at this defense until tanks come around. Besides if the terran is allowed by the zerg the spare MnM to leave base to be aggressive AND at the same time defend vs mutalisks, then fuck, there is something very wrong with the zerg's macro. All in all I really think you post some of THE most retarded, shallow and one sided analyses without seeing the whole picture of the game and how the metagame flows. If the terran makes mistake fuck him. Well yes, if the zerg makes one - oh shit i can't lift hatchery crap terran is imba. Ask a zerg then if 10 irradiating vessels + 50 3/3 marines + 10 medics not IMBA... It's just the way of the game - terran is less mobile so in general he must wait to gather a rather significant army to attack. Zerg can afford to be more aggressive early, to deny scouting and tech differently. It's just the game. Get over it. Or quit. But don't bitch around cause,Jesus, you annoy the shit out of people here. Or at least don't bitch without stats of thousand games to prove your point. Even in those Protoss happy times the top 10 in KeSPA's November Starcraft Rankings have 3 zergs and... WHAT? 2 terrans?? Impossible! Can't those guys lift ccs?!? It's an easy to execute mechanic and a major contributor to a game winning plan. Dude, it's here, stated by F13. Must be true then... TvZ is not ugly imbalanced. Nor is any other matchup. In modern progaming it's about map imbalances. And who's having a better day and has practiced more for the event. Crap I am so pissed... | ||
zatic
Zurich15310 Posts
To back up your claims, can you link a number of games please where lifting the CC won Terran the game? It has to be a game where the CC lifting was determining, meaning that not lifting CC would have won the game for Zerg or made it at least even. | ||
|
SpiritoftheTunA
United States20903 Posts
i hate fuckers like you learn sc or fuck off, dont whine and try to get blizz to rebalance, the fuck? god you suck kill yourself | ||
|
alffla
Hong Kong20321 Posts
| ||
|
SpiritoftheTunA
United States20903 Posts
HOLY SHIT LOOK AT THIS EDIT: LOL A TvP IMBALANCE THREAD BEcAUSE YOU SUCKED AT P NOW YOU SUCK AT Z AND YOU'RE MAKING TvZ IMBALANCE THREADS THIS IS A JOKE | ||
|
hymn
Bulgaria832 Posts
Not lifted cc, cc dies. Terran still wins. How did the universe not implode? | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
The PondCast
WardiTV Invitational
Replay Cast
OSC
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
CranKy Ducklings
WardiTV Invitational
[BSL 2025] Weekly
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
