As a terran player I'm happy with the upcoming patch. I really hope that the "T is imba" comments will dissapear but I'm not expecting it.
Fruitdealer was complaining about tvz a lot, but he still owned several terrans. I really hope this patch will help the zergs more, so any possible imbalance dissapears. Depot before rax makes the possibility for zerg to expand before pool. More roach range will help a lot against helion harassment and reaper speed on factory means that zerg doesn't need to worry about reapers with speed.
Am I the only one thinking that broodlords are good vs terran? Lategame a 200/200 terran army can lose hard against a 200/200 zerg army. If there is a possible chance of broodlords, you need to make vikings as a terran. This will weaken your ground army a lot, which gives the zergs even a better chance to defeat the terran army. But ofcourse I can be wrong .
"I want the Brood Lord to get stronger. The current Brood Lord dies extremely easily, hard to produce, and it’s not cost effective. I don’t like both the Ultralisk and Brood Lord, but out of the high tier units, the only high tier unit I would use is the Ultralisk. Ultralisk is good for putting an end to a game, but if used when the game is turning unfavorable towards you it is difficult to put it into good use. The Zerg race needs units like High Templar." Should of said Defiler to put it more into perspective. I'm sure Blizzard has that in store for HotS but that's going to take ages :'(
On October 13 2010 12:18 Tachion wrote: Broodlords are a late game cheese in ZvT and don't really work once a Terran knows they're coming. I'm surprised people are ragging on him so much for that. The HT comment was a little weird considering you have banelings and Infestors to fill that AoEish type role, I'd have liked to hear more about what he meant by that.
I think he meant that zerg needs a fallback type of unit. Terrans have tanks, protoss have HTs, but zerg lack a unit like the defiler in BW that can turn the tides of a losing battle, as the infestor would only fit that role vs a pure bio army.
Or the Lurker... ;_; Infestors can KINDA do this... fungaling an army repeatedly to stall for time. But zerg doesn't seem to have a "YOU SHALL NOT PASS" unit like tank/colossus/HT that trades mobility for RAAAANGE.
I too think a major problem with brood lords is the viking. Vikings camping above an army means you can't put brood lords in range, and can't engage the super-long-range vikings even with a significantly superior muta/corruptor force. No ground-to-air the zerg has can get close enough to engage vikings either - queens and hydras are both painfully slow off creep.
I too think a major problem with brood lords is the viking. Vikings camping above an army means you can't put brood lords in range, and can't engage the super-long-range vikings even with a significantly superior muta/corruptor force. No ground-to-air the zerg has can get close enough to engage vikings either - queens and hydras are both painfully slow off creep.
I agree. The problem is the Viking, not the Brood Lord.
Am I the only one thinking that broodlords are good vs terran? Lategame a 200/200 terran army can lose hard against a 200/200 zerg army. If there is a possible chance of broodlords, you need to make vikings as a terran. This will weaken your ground army a lot, which gives the zergs even a better chance to defeat the terran army. But ofcourse I can be wrong .
Vikings have the same range as a Brood Lord. That means a Viking really doesn't need to engage an army to snipe off the brood lords. It really doesn't take that much effort to pump like 4-5 Vikings out of a reactor, especially considering the effort that it takes to get Brood Lords out. Vikings can shut down brood lords HARD because of the long range.
On October 13 2010 10:35 ckw wrote: Oh gawd, he wins the first GSL and now everyone looks to him for what balance should be which I think is a terrible idea. He thinks BroodLords need a buff and now all of a sudden on the ladder all I hear is "You're lucky my BroodLords are UP or you would have been roflstomped!" Oh boy it's getting pretty pathetic, I understand, the guy is a great great player but that doesn't mean that his biased opinion on what balance is for Zerg is any better than IdrA or MorroW or anyone else that is a respectable player. I think the most obnoxious ideas for balance have come from this guy and if things were his way we would have a very very OP Zerg and him saying things are perfect..
Also, his thoughts on PvT are accurate until late game when I really beleive that Terran has the harder time winning. I'm not saying it's unbalanced, only that it's a pretty good game at that point.
His biggest problem wit the patch was PvT. That's totally evidence of a zerg bias and not just you complaining about a supposed bias. Also, as long as he's a thousand times better than you, you don't get to call him crazy. You can disagree and he can be wrong, but his knowledge of the game is obviously far superior to yours so that's something to consider when whining about biased someone ELSE is.
On October 13 2010 11:17 baller wrote: yah man totally agree zerg needs a unit like high templar. throw in zerg marauder and colossus also that should really make it better. asking this dude about 1.2 is like asking a dog whether the patch that reduces cat legs from 4 to 3 is balanced.
you're probably the only non-mod person that can get away with an ignorant/hateful post like this..I think FD's insight deserves more credit than you mentioned since the guy IS currently the best zerg in the world....
ckw Oh gawd, he wins the first GSL and now everyone looks to him for what balance should be which I think is a terrible idea. He thinks BroodLords need a buff and now all of a sudden on the ladder all I hear is "You're lucky my BroodLords are UP or you would have been roflstomped!" Oh boy it's getting pretty pathetic, I understand, the guy is a great great player but that doesn't mean that his biased opinion on what balance is for Zerg is any better than IdrA or MorroW or anyone else that is a respectable player. I think the most obnoxious ideas for balance have come from this guy and if things were his way we would have a very very OP Zerg and him saying things are perfect..
Also, his thoughts on PvT are accurate until late game when I really beleive that Terran has the harder time winning. I'm not saying it's unbalanced, only that it's a pretty good game at that point.
Completely Agree, lol @ zerg need a unit like HT. Does terran have a unit like that? It's kind of surprising that a player that good seems so blissfully biased and completely ignorant of the terran perspective. but yeah hope people dont start taking all his ideas as law
Terran doesn't NEED a unit like that. That's how cost effective /powerful their armies are.
On October 14 2010 05:10 partysnatcher wrote: As a fan of buffing Zerg, and a huge fan of Fruitdealer, I still have to say listening to Fruitdealer in this issue feels wrong, he can't really be unbiased here.
It's a bit like listening to TLO ("I think Zerg is fine!") and then he "just happens" to be the Random master who "just happened" to go Terran only for sooome weird reason. Keep in mind that I have huge amounts of respect for TLO as well, but you can't say Zerg is fine when there were only 2 zergs left in the RO16.
Zergs have been working on their game for months and months, trying to find small holes, and Fruitdealer has certainly found them. Now with patch 1.2, it might be Terrans who have to play defensive, look for those small holes and polish their game to perfection.
Did you ever wonder, for instance, why scans and expos are more used in TvTs? Probably because that's where Terrans have had to evolve the most. Stop your QQ Terrans, there is heavy evidence that you have been balance-favored for months now.
Actually, he went from Random to race-picking Zerg and Terran for a while, then exclusively Terran. Not saying anything about balance but just wanted to correct the statement.
Similar to TLO's or Idra's statements about balance, you probably shouldn't take too much out of Fruitdealer's talk about balance either. People who have something to gain from balance favoring them will never be unbiased.
My point is that TLO, Idra and Fruitdealer all have good points, but you still can't just swallow their opinions whole. I mean, take the most disgusting example of egoism, when we still see Terran players claiming SC2 is balanced and how they are completely sure that Zerg will become OP in 1.2 (despite the way Zergs get eliminated out of tournaments and Terrans dominating).
Take Idra. If you pick out the core of Idra's statements; the lack of options, scouting and harassment, that's just the truth. You can pick out one strategy at a time, count them, and conclude mathematically "T has more options than Z". That's just a fact.
You can also look at the amount of Terrans in top tournament tiers and see that Terran still dominate, even in 1.1.
I admire fruitdealers strategic wit, but i think his opinion on balance is like asking a fox how the hen house should be gaurded. I think the big problem with the game if anything is a lack of diversity in terms of types of build and strategy. Strategic diversity easily can trump any failing of individual units or imbalances, making races more robust to any nerf and the game more exciting in general.
Why is it that a zerg MUST get a fast expand? Surely a need for larvae isnt enough of an explanation for this for he could put it in the saftey of the bases terrain, away from reaper exploitable cliffs. But a solution that just powers up the one opening strat zerg has been milking constantly is no solution at all to this. If terran is *too strong* cause of their utter potential for change and adaptation why submit to envy and think it should be taken away? Taking it away would only detract from the game in total. If anything this shows that the other races should be able to have a more comparable versatility that is distinctly toss and zerg.
Zerg already has the seeds of this versatility in its unique mode of production. Build one building and you enhance the production of every unit. Build one building and you increase the types of stuff you can make out of every hatch. This sorta makes it needed that zerg has to take longer to tech up. Perhaps what is more neccessary is cost rather than time, for with less of a resource risk in teching up, the zerg could mroe easily increase their versatility without sacrificing immediate military power too much. If the zerg can easily radiate their tech, that means cause they can now make brood lords doesnt mean they for certain plan to in the near future. If this doesnt have to mean they must be planning to use it in the near future, all of a sudden scouting it gives a lot less information, mitigating the relative scout disadvantage zerg is percieved to have.
Terrans and Toss dont have the mentality that they get a free expo jsut by virtue of their race, they have to make sure it will get up and be able to develope, thus the reason they are aggressive early on *or jsut completely walling the expo off in toss case sometimes*.
How would it be bad if a zerg has to plan smartly for his expands? Surely acheiving the need for this can only enhance the tactical beauty of the game and the game should balance to support it.
There should be reasons to fight at all stages of the game potentialy and do decisive damage as well as a need to secure important territory. If zerg has trouble with this, I think they need help in becoming more capable at it but not in some uninspired way of unit counters or enhancing baneling busts or other low, direct, tactics. Lazyness and inflexibility in strategy must not be rewarded and the game shouldnt be made into a samey mess in order to acheive balance.
On October 13 2010 15:14 RHMVNovus wrote: As a Zerg (surprise), I don't think he's that off the mark when it comes to tide-shifting units. I say this not just because all the Zerg late-game options are utterly meh, but because the Zerg spellcasters are significantly more boring than the Protoss or Terran casters. Depending on how strenuously one defines 'caster,' we have the following list for casters of the three races:
Things that are technically casters but probably shouldn't be there are Thors (due to rarity of use), Banshees, and DTs due to cloak. The top list is probably more interesting, honestly. Queens only have real one combat spell, and are mostly economic spellcasters. Overseers are useful but have no real military application. So, we have Infestors vs. Ghost/Raven vs. HT/Mothership.
Bottom line: the game require more spellcasters.
You forgot sentries for toss, guardian shield, forcefield, and hallucination. id say that qualifies as a caster.
Zergs NEED to fast expand because if you noticed, they're a macro-based race and they need to better economy than the other races just to keep up. The units are more fragile and you need more quantity of them.
Not to mention they're the most gas hungry race
If you seriously had to ask that question, I don't think the rest of your input can be taken seriously
Zerg units are the least cost effective and they are horrible at aggression because there is so much more risk involved because early aggression destroys the economy. Zerg needs the FE.
I think ppl make too many broodlords..you need corruptors to deal with vikings. If I have 8 corruptors, I never make more broodlords than 3. In the end you do more dmg over time of you keep them in place, and alive. If you need more, they morph in a flash.
On October 15 2010 06:22 lastmotion wrote: @GathFox
Zergs NEED to fast expand because if you noticed, they're a macro-based race and they need to better economy than the other races just to keep up. The units are more fragile and you need more quantity of them.
Not to mention they're the most gas hungry race
If you seriously had to ask that question, I don't think the rest of your input can be taken seriously
I dont really see how they are so inherently gass hungry, their unit costs in comparison to terran and toss homologues are pretty even. Most builds like muta ling baneling just choose to be gass heavy in comparison to minerals *and its always compared to something else as every build is relatively gass heavy to nothing* and if you are very heavy in unused minerals why not use these up by investing in say overlords expos hatcheries ect and more lings of course lol. if you want to see a gas hungry race look at how much going domminently sentries or high templar or ghost or RAVEN *most pronounced gass hungry build there alone id think* can be. Clearly these races have builds that require a lot of gass as well.
Pros make their first hatch in base at times, *proof is here as a cast by HD starcraft lol im following TL expectations by actualy showing an example* but he still fast expands sorta *and is punished for it*
And some of the obvious advantages *though with the new patch some less needed* are first of all your extra production is not as vulnerable to reaper or extra cliff exploiting harrass due to not being by exploitable cliffs* this may seem durrrr obvious to me but maybe some people dont quite realize the advantage of avoiding a foes advantage*, and wise placement of the hatchery can impede the attack avenues of a hellion on your main drone line, making their less surface perimeter to attack from and longer distances the hellion must run compared to the same queen walk distance. Sure you may be saturating your main first and then have to meynard when you do take that second thus making both expos mine out unevenly but there are situations where it can be well worth the risk.
Now this doesnt mean you wont expand fairly early, but it will be later and probably more secure *and its still faster compared to what is ussualy a fast expand for a terran or toss i would imagine*. and would be able to facilitate aggressive variants of the strategy too. and expanding is important to all races not jsut zerg and definitely not too much more.
On the idea that zerg MUST fast expand and Zerg MUST use gass heavy builds, this mindset is what is probably really killing your race; mental and imaginative inflexibility, pride induced stasis, not thinking outside the idra box. sure you may not have as much BO versatility as terran with his less constrained tech tree but that dont mean that your build can not be as diverse, just diverse in different ways. TLO, a former random player now mostly terran and part zerg player is a source of a lot of unorthodox and insane strategies that can often work. If he stuck to every convention i dont think he would be as successfull as he is now. Builds like mass reaper were gas heavy inventions that went agaisnt the orthodox as well *thank you LzGamer, i think, for that build concept*
Phew, now finally my last point, if your going to try to counter someones arguement, defeat it with logic and reason rather than general stereotypes without at least any explanation to why they apply. Just because someone actually tries to look at the game from a different non-cloned perspective doesnt mean they can not be right. judge an idea based on its merits not on things such as a players rank or what some random pro says cause they can be irrelevant just like some bronze league noob if the idea is an inferior one.
I agree that zerg does not have to fast expand. Zerg needs to get an exp realitvely fast, but not at 14-20. 22-24 like Check does a lot feeles very nice when he does it. He expands very fail-safe without cutting back on drones, and uses zerg capabilities of non-gas unit/defence. I actually think Check is a nice example of a Wc3 player coming in from a different angle. Since I am a BW player since 1999 now(with breaks), I also like the fast expanding, and trying to survive with as little as possible, and then winning consitently at the 20 minute mark..but it's really not the only way to play zerg.
EPT
.
