‘The Zerg definitely got better, but it will not affect me too much’ – Kim Won Ki’s (Fruitdealer) opinion of 1.2 Patch.
On October 8th, Kim Won Ki revealed his opinion of the upcoming 1.2 patch.
Patch 1.2, scheduled to be the next upcoming patch, has been a hot topic for its boost for the Zerg and its nerf on the Terran. For the zerg community, known for its complaints and it’s so called “Zerg QQ”, the patch has been accepted as a wonderful news.
So Star2Josun interviewed the winner of GSL(Global Star2 League) Season 1, “JJug” (Korean slang for Amazing Zerg player) Kim Won Ki (Zerg/Fruitdealer) and asked his thoughts about the upcoming patch.
Q: The patch notes for patch 1.2 have been revealed. What are your thoughts on its boost for Zerg? I heard about the patch and I welcome it. I’m not exactly sure what will happen until the patch is done. I think I’ll be able to decide how I feel about it once it is released. My main race is not Protoss, but in a Protoss v.s Terran match, Protoss has hard time dealing with Terran, so I’m disappointed that a fix for this issue was not part of the patch.
Q: What effects do you think the Patch will have for Zergs against both Terran and Protoss? Thanks to the Roach’s increase in range, their usefulness dramatically increased in ZvP matchups. For ZvT, due to the inability of making Fast barracks for Terrans, I think Zerg will always be able to take their expansion first. In response to this, I think Terrans will have to harass the early expansion through fast scouting. Overall, since Zerg does not have to worry about 10 Barracks or reapers, I think they have taken a huge advantage. I think the Zerg race is getting better.
Q: How are the receptions for this patch for the people around you? There have been many talks about the requirement of supply depot for building barracks. However, the Zerg users are welcoming it with open arms.
Q: How do you think this will affect you? I don’t think it will have a significant effect on my game play. It’s just that ZvP is a hard match up for me and since the Roaches are getting higher range, I think it’s now turning out to be a do-able match up for me.
Q: What Zerg unit do you think needs some boosts? 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.
Q: Did you receive the GSL Prize Money? If you did, how are you planning to use it? I did not receive the prize money yet (laughs). I did not yet think about how I want to use the money.
Q: Your comments on your upcoming matches in GSL Season 2. I will just think about passing through the next rounds starting from the preliminaries. Zerg Fighting! (Fighting is way of cheering in Korean).
On October 13 2010 10:05 Str1keFreedom wrote: My main race is not Protoss, but in a Protoss v.s Terran match, Protoss has hard time dealing with Terran, so I’m disappointed that a fix for this issue was not part of the patch.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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 I think was ment to say that If you get a few good storms off you can turn the game around, and there is no unit like that for Zerg. I don't think he was asking for a Infested high templar unit or anything :p just a unit that can change the flow of the game with some good unit usage.
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.
Brood Lord cost too much and are too hard to get to then be so fragile AND slow. One of these areas should be improved on. They have too many disadvantages at the moment
Maybe in beta with their extra bulkiness their high cost and low speed was justified, but now, I think they could stand for more speed, reduced cost, or more bulk again. Personally I think more speed would be preferable, that way they wouldn't lag the Zerg army so bad
On October 13 2010 12:55 FuzzyJAM wrote: People have been saying BL are UP for a long time. Were they used at all in the GSL? I don't remember it happening. Kind of says it all, doesn't it?
Losira tried to get them against TLO in game one but TLO rolled him in the window where he was teching to them. Plus he started building vikings in anticipation of a Broodlord switch knowing that they would probably be coming so he would have won anyway,
I think his comment about broodlords and 'zerg high templar' might be worded funny or just plain misinterperted. I think what he's saying is that broodlords and ultralisks aren't effective late game units for swinging the momentum back in zergs favor if they're behind, which I'd have to agree with.
In BW there have been epic games where the zerg is dying and terran is pushing into his natural or main and right when zerg is about to die, bam! dark swarm goes down and zerg push back terran. Slowly they are able to put terran on the defensive while they make 3 more expansions and get back in the game.
Some zerg feel that late game ZvT is about surviving until zerg gets ultras and win. Zerg really don't have a unit that can help shift the momentum back in their favor if they didn't, for lack of a better expression, survive well enough. The unit that meets that critiera in SC2 is the high templar. And zerg had a unit like that in BW called the defiler.
Fruitseller probably wants broodlords to help fill that dark swarm shaped hole in the zerg's game, but that probably won't happen. Maybe zerg will get defilers in the next expansion.
EDIT: Apparently other people in the thread agree with me and I didn't bother to read all the comments before posting. I'll still leave this up.
On October 13 2010 13:08 Arolis wrote: I think his comment about broodlords and 'zerg high templar' might be worded funny or just plain misinterperted. I think what he's saying is that broodlords and ultralisks aren't effective late game units for swinging the momentum back in zergs favor if they're behind, which I'd have to agree with.
In BW there have been epic games where the zerg is dying and terran is pushing into his natural or main and right when zerg is about to die, bam! dark swarm goes down and zerg push back terran. Slowly they are able to put terran on the defensive while they make 3 more expansions and get back in the game.
Some zerg feel that late game ZvT is about surviving until zerg gets ultras and win. Zerg really don't have a unit that can help shift the momentum back in their favor if they didn't, for lack of a better expression, survive well enough. The unit that meets that critiera in SC2 is the high templar. And zerg had a unit like that in BW called the defiler.
Fruitseller probably wants broodlords to help fill that dark swarm shaped hole in the zerg's game, but that probably won't happen. Maybe zerg will get defilers in the next expansion.
The translation was done word for word. He did say zerg needs units like high templar and other remarks. Nothing was exaggerated nor changed.
haha Gom please dont CPL out on us. xD I like what he has to say about the PvT aspects though, someone turn down the marauder those things are too hot.
Nope its not combination of JJang, although that means amazing as well. It comes from slang Jjunda. Which is used to indicate something is really good. Close though.
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.
Like many have already said, taking what FruitDealer is saying as a fact is a mistake. I respect him a lot, I also think he's actually one of the best players in SC2, but his arguments are inevitably biased.
Starcraft 2 e-sport is his job. He can literally win up to 85,700$ each month by being good at Starcraft 2, so of course he wants to have more chances of winning. It's like asking an office worker if he wants to be paid 20$ an hours or 70$ an hour. No matter how a progamer is good and understand the game, he will always want his race the be stronger and stronger.
Finally, I think ZvP is a pretty fair matchup actually, and it's the harder matchups for most diamond Protoss players. You have to be a lot more aware than in PvT, because if you stop to pressure only 2 seconds troughout the game, you can't come back. Most protoss players would rather face a Terran than a Zerg nowadays. In this way, I think it's ok terran are nerfed for zergs only (barrack and nitro packs delay), but I don't think zergs should get any more buff (like an HT-kind of unit).
For those who don't want to search through it, here is what they revealed would be in the next patch: + Show Spoiler +
The balance changes in our next patch will primarily focus on improving the zerg.
Here are a few of the changes we currently have planned:
* We're increasing roach range. This will allow roaches to be more effective in large groups, giving the zerg more options in the mid to end game.
* Fungal Growth will now prevent Blink, which will give zerg a way to stop endlessly Blinking stalkers which can be very challenging to deal with in large numbers.
* The Barracks are going to require a Supply Depot, which will impact a lot of early terran reaper pushes.
* The reaper speed upgrade will require the Factory, which is meant to weaken a lot of the early terran reaper attacks that dominate so many matches, especially in team games.
* We're making a number of increases to the health of zerg buildings, which will make the very vulnerable zerg technology structures more resistant to raids. We don’t expect these hit point changes to have a super significant impact on the game, but the current numbers felt way too low.
We want our avid and talented StarCraft II players to know that we're here, we're listening, and that our intent is to continue making careful and measured approaches to balance based on community and fansite feedback, our numbers and data, watching pro players and tournaments, and our own time on Battle.net playing the game alongside you
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.
He's GSL winner and you're 1k diamond. Who knows better about balance, I wonder...
Can we NOT turn this into the everyday "I dont mind your opinion because i lack proof of mine" discussion?
BTT: Fruitdealer fighting! With roaches added range i guess we can see a Hydra / roach combo more often, which might totally screw away Protoss.
Broodlords are a real delay to the speed of a Z army, if you use them without your army to harass they are just sniped away by vikings :-/. The way they are at the moment I only use BL in teamgames, for the obvious reasons of needing protection ("low" hp) and being slow.
On the other hand, i do not agree with FD´s opinion about ultras. They can totally turn the tides against some armys (Bioballs, Hellion - heavy metal, HT/Stalker/Sentry, ...) and are quite useable as he already mentioned. The only problem i have with them is the way of teching, when my Ultra den is in i most of the time have used up all my gas on infestors or mutas :-/
1.2 will be an interesting patch, i hope Z is going to be o.k. and not OP after it.
Holy hell, a Brood Lord buff? That would tear me apart inside. As a protoss player, I can't deal them, so long as they have the presence of mind to keep a couple of corrupters around to defend against void rays. I know that blink stalkers can work, but I can't make em. Sigh, pro balance and noob balance just don't add up sometimes.
On October 13 2010 10:09 TheNessman wrote: "The Zerg race needs units like High Templar."
Yeah i remember the defiler too...
but Thanks for the Translation! Really interesting.
They are called infestors....
How much more similar do you want 2 units you trade a bit of damage from psi storm for the ability to hold things still which seems to be much more useful at the high end due to micro. Maybe he wants infested archons?
Edit: not to say i know the game inside out but the similarities are striking
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.
I'm not so sure about this one. More units with energy or abilities means that feedback and EMP become that much more powerful/versatile. Although, I would agree Zerg's spells are somewhat lame besides Fungal. Then again, maybe we just haven't seen units like Overseers being utilized enough by high level players yet.
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 may think your cool but Fruitdealer is a step above you in baller status
On October 13 2010 10:05 Str1keFreedom wrote: Q: Your comments on your upcoming matches in GSL Season 2. I will just think about passing through the next rounds starting from the preliminaries. Zerg Fighting! (Fighting is way of cheering in Korean).
I just want to clarify that while the rest of the interview was translated just fine there's a big error in this part.
For Koreans, fighting is a way of punching, kicking, or proxying. I think what the translator meant to say was "Hwaiting," which is actually a way of cheering.
Kinda understand his viewpoint. PvZ is the one matchup where the race coming into the lategame with an advantage usualy roflstomps the other. The matchups shift around from early, mid to lategame a bit too much anyway if you ask me.
But then again, maps play such a big role in this matter plus the late game will develop a lot more over time.
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.
Lol even when you feel baller is being unfair, it's so hard not to love his posts because of how funny they are.
In BW, the Hive offers Adrenal Glands, Defilers, Devourers, Guardians, Ultralisks, and level 3 upgrades.
In SC2, the Hive offers Broodlords, Ultralisks, and level 3 upgrades. (Adrenal Glands sucks now.) That's far less incentive to build a Hive, particularly against Terran since Vikings tend to negate capital ships.
Perhaps we could fill that gap by buffing Adrenal Glands, bringing back Lurker Aspect as a tier 3 research for the Hydralisk, and giving Queens and/or Overseers an ability that requires Hive to research? Zerg is never getting the defiler back; a unit that ridiculously efficient can't coexist with Zerg's new macro mechanic that allows a Hatchery + a Queen to produce nearly as many larva as three BW hatcheries. (Zerglings had to be nerfed for the same reason.) But perhaps Zerg's backup spellcasters can bear some of the spellcasting burden.
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.
He's GSL winner and you're 1k diamond. Who knows better about balance, I wonder...
Good players are not always right about balance just because they are good. I remember IdrA in BW saying that a highly Z-favoured map would be heavily T-favoured before it was released.
It would be hard to put defiler back in because of unit blobbing making it too good.
On October 13 2010 10:05 Str1keFreedom wrote: [b]My main race is not Protoss, but in a Protoss v.s Terran match, Protoss has hard time dealing with Terran, so I’m disappointed that a fix for this issue was not part of the patch.
Wow I've been so bashed about saying this for not beeing a pro. It feels sooo good having it said by a pro.
Pretty sure when he says he wants a unit like High Templar, he doesn't actually mean getting a zerg copy of High Templar, but rather a unit that plays out like High Templar. Kind of think Infestors fill that role but they are mainly to support your army, where as High Temps are more apart of the damage of your army. Back when they had infinite length NP they felt allot more like High Temps.
On October 13 2010 10:05 Str1keFreedom wrote: [b]My main race is not Protoss, but in a Protoss v.s Terran match, Protoss has hard time dealing with Terran, so I’m disappointed that a fix for this issue was not part of the patch.
Wow I've been so bashed about saying this for not beeing a pro. It feels sooo good having it said by a pro.
Hydras with some support dominate Toss until Templars (or Colossi), then Hydras get owned really bad and you would need to be extremly ahead to still beat a Protoss whiteout totally changing your unitmixture.
Or in short: Hydras enter the game --> Hydras own --> Templar enter the game --> Hydras suck.
My main race is not Protoss, but in a Protoss v.s Terran match, Protoss has hard time dealing with Terran, so I’m disappointed that a fix for this issue was not part of the patch.
Absolute bullshit i think ... in Lategame Protoss is definitely in favour
Bullshit, Terran mobility destroys Protoss mobility, furthermore we can't defend our expansions to shit like 2 medivacs filled with stimmed marauders. No Nexus defence compared to Zerg or Terran.
On October 13 2010 10:05 Str1keFreedom wrote: [b]My main race is not Protoss, but in a Protoss v.s Terran match, Protoss has hard time dealing with Terran, so I’m disappointed that a fix for this issue was not part of the patch.
Wow I've been so bashed about saying this for not beeing a pro. It feels sooo good having it said by a pro.
Despite what these top players say. I must admit this makes it very obvious that Blizzard knows what they are doing. I read a recent Idra post that the terran nerf was more significant after he played around with it. Now Idra complains about zvp
On October 13 2010 11:22 SheerStress wrote: 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
They had to weaken broodlord in beta because they are too strong. I think they are fine as they currently are. However, the reaper/rax changes are huge.
Also, with the change in roach range, do you think they will replace hydras?
On October 13 2010 17:21 Severedevil wrote: In BW, the Hive offers Adrenal Glands, Defilers, Devourers, Guardians, Ultralisks, and level 3 upgrades.
In SC2, the Hive offers Broodlords, Ultralisks, and level 3 upgrades. (Adrenal Glands sucks now.) That's far less incentive to build a Hive, particularly against Terran since Vikings tend to negate capital ships.
Perhaps we could fill that gap by buffing Adrenal Glands, bringing back Lurker Aspect as a tier 3 research for the Hydralisk, and giving Queens and/or Overseers an ability that requires Hive to research? Zerg is never getting the defiler back; a unit that ridiculously efficient can't coexist with Zerg's new macro mechanic that allows a Hatchery + a Queen to produce nearly as many larva as three BW hatcheries. (Zerglings had to be nerfed for the same reason.) But perhaps Zerg's backup spellcasters can bear some of the spellcasting burden.
Are you fucking retarded? Ultralisks own. Have any of you actually played good zergs? When they get an expo up its pretty fucking hard as a terran. Fruitdealer thoroughly raped one of if not the best terrans in the world and we still have people bitching about brining back lurkers and shit
- _-
Fungal owns vikings. If your Brood Lords are dying to them fungal and then hydra or corruptor.
On October 13 2010 18:38 abrasion wrote: Bullshit, Terran mobility destroys Protoss mobility, furthermore we can't defend our expansions to shit like 2 medivacs filled with stimmed marauders. No Nexus defence compared to Zerg or Terran.
You dont need to. Just make a few colossus and micro and turn the game into whoever attacks loses. You also can warp in templars that can storm instantly. GTFO
On October 13 2010 17:21 Severedevil wrote: In BW, the Hive offers Adrenal Glands, Defilers, Devourers, Guardians, Ultralisks, and level 3 upgrades.
In SC2, the Hive offers Broodlords, Ultralisks, and level 3 upgrades. (Adrenal Glands sucks now.) That's far less incentive to build a Hive, particularly against Terran since Vikings tend to negate capital ships.
Perhaps we could fill that gap by buffing Adrenal Glands, bringing back Lurker Aspect as a tier 3 research for the Hydralisk, and giving Queens and/or Overseers an ability that requires Hive to research? Zerg is never getting the defiler back; a unit that ridiculously efficient can't coexist with Zerg's new macro mechanic that allows a Hatchery + a Queen to produce nearly as many larva as three BW hatcheries. (Zerglings had to be nerfed for the same reason.) But perhaps Zerg's backup spellcasters can bear some of the spellcasting burden.
Are you fucking retarded? Ultralisks own. Have any of you actually played good zergs? When they get an expo up its pretty fucking hard as a terran. Fruitdealer thoroughly raped one of if not the best terrans in the world and we still have people bitching about brining back lurkers and shit
- _-
Fungal owns vikings. If your Brood Lords are dying to them fungal and then hydra or corruptor.
Stop bitching.
rainbow didnt abuse any of the things that makes terran good vs zerg, you cant reference that series for anything ya if z gets up an econ unmolested its strong, but that should never, ever happen.
On October 13 2010 17:21 Severedevil wrote: In BW, the Hive offers Adrenal Glands, Defilers, Devourers, Guardians, Ultralisks, and level 3 upgrades.
In SC2, the Hive offers Broodlords, Ultralisks, and level 3 upgrades. (Adrenal Glands sucks now.) That's far less incentive to build a Hive, particularly against Terran since Vikings tend to negate capital ships.
Perhaps we could fill that gap by buffing Adrenal Glands, bringing back Lurker Aspect as a tier 3 research for the Hydralisk, and giving Queens and/or Overseers an ability that requires Hive to research? Zerg is never getting the defiler back; a unit that ridiculously efficient can't coexist with Zerg's new macro mechanic that allows a Hatchery + a Queen to produce nearly as many larva as three BW hatcheries. (Zerglings had to be nerfed for the same reason.) But perhaps Zerg's backup spellcasters can bear some of the spellcasting burden.
Are you fucking retarded? Ultralisks own. Have any of you actually played good zergs? When they get an expo up its pretty fucking hard as a terran. Fruitdealer thoroughly raped one of if not the best terrans in the world and we still have people bitching about brining back lurkers and shit
- _-
Fungal owns vikings. If your Brood Lords are dying to them fungal and then hydra or corruptor.
Stop bitching.
Do you even play Zerg? And leave out the profanity. The reason Zerg go to Hive now isn't because ultras are amazing. It's because Zerg units suck so hard that unless you're ahead by 80 supply, you're going to lose horribly in a fight unless you have ultra/infestor. Ultras aren't some amazing unit. They're just the only good combat unit Zerg have. Everything else Zerg have is too low hp and dies horribly to AoE.
On October 13 2010 10:05 Str1keFreedom wrote: My main race is not Protoss, but in a Protoss v.s Terran match, Protoss has hard time dealing with Terran, so I’m disappointed that a fix for this issue was not part of the patch.
MARRY ME FRUITDEALER
ROFL
I hope roach doesnt become op by range buff...i think it has now range of 5, same as marine?
As good as these guys are in SC2, I still think many of them don't realize how young of a game it is compared to BW. While I appreciate their skill... it still seems like so many of their opinions on balance vary greatly from player to player, and really can't be used as the basis for any changes.
On October 13 2010 17:21 Severedevil wrote: In BW, the Hive offers Adrenal Glands, Defilers, Devourers, Guardians, Ultralisks, and level 3 upgrades.
In SC2, the Hive offers Broodlords, Ultralisks, and level 3 upgrades. (Adrenal Glands sucks now.) That's far less incentive to build a Hive, particularly against Terran since Vikings tend to negate capital ships.
Perhaps we could fill that gap by buffing Adrenal Glands, bringing back Lurker Aspect as a tier 3 research for the Hydralisk, and giving Queens and/or Overseers an ability that requires Hive to research? Zerg is never getting the defiler back; a unit that ridiculously efficient can't coexist with Zerg's new macro mechanic that allows a Hatchery + a Queen to produce nearly as many larva as three BW hatcheries. (Zerglings had to be nerfed for the same reason.) But perhaps Zerg's backup spellcasters can bear some of the spellcasting burden.
Are you fucking retarded? Ultralisks own. Have any of you actually played good zergs? When they get an expo up its pretty fucking hard as a terran. Fruitdealer thoroughly raped one of if not the best terrans in the world and we still have people bitching about brining back lurkers and shit
- _-
Fungal owns vikings. If your Brood Lords are dying to them fungal and then hydra or corruptor.
Stop bitching.
rainbow didnt abuse any of the things that makes terran good vs zerg, you cant reference that series for anything ya if z gets up an econ unmolested its strong, but that should never, ever happen.
Um, didn't he do the tank drop that you whined about when you got dominated by it? Didn't you ask your opponent to apologize to you because you seemed to think it was unbeatable?
So tell us what the PROPER terran opening is vs. zerg, since apparently Rainbow has no idea how to play against them.
i'm a terran player, but i do have to agree that the zerg buffs are pretty necessary -- when i play 2v2 i play random and i find myself almost never using roaches, i'll use roaches when the correct counter is pretty obvious, but i'd choose the hydra over the roach almost every time. -- without their tunnel claws/movement speed their a ground to ground armored unit that has no range so i think the buff was good. i dunno about the broodlords getting buffer tho as they're fine imo as they are.
FD makes some good points and ofc he will be somewhat biased, we all are.
BL's get ripped apart by vikings, hence why i always knock a few out when playing against zerg past 25 minutes.... at some point the zerg will get them, and if i have 8-9 vikings i can scare them away while i deal with the ground army.
Perhaps zerg will get their "HT" unit in the expac, terran are getting the Medic (don't remember if they released anything else about new units) from campaign. I do agree that zerg don't seem to have a unit that you can point to and say "That will save my ass". Terran defo do, infact they have more than one depending on the situation....
one ghost can turn a battle in TvP with a well placed EMP, one raven can turn a battle with PDD against a heavy stalker army and can do the same against zerg or other terrans. Ofc a nuke can always push an army back as TLO showed back in GSL. Even just rolling up 2-3 extra tanks to the back of your army and seige-up can turn a battle in an instant. I can't ever think of playing against a zerg who was losing heavily and one unit pops out and turns the tide. Maybe ultra's after 1.1 and before 1.1.1 but thats about all i can think of.
Haha, Cool actually benefits from TvP being in Terran's favor, because in tournaments this allows him to not bother with many beastly Protosses that get taken out by the Terran crowd, which then he eats for breakfast happily. ^^ If his ZvT >> ZvP, of course he prefers TvP to be in T's favor.
He probably says it out of loyalty to his dear friend Ki Soo, who got eliminated by Terrans in both GSL seasons so far (HopeTorture(T) and FlintZenith(T)).
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.
Yeah cause we all know how OP templars are vs mech.
On October 14 2010 02:05 ahcho00 wrote: i'm a terran player, but i do have to agree that the zerg buffs are pretty necessary -- when i play 2v2 i play random and i find myself almost never using roaches, i'll use roaches when the correct counter is pretty obvious, but i'd choose the hydra over the roach almost every time. -- without their tunnel claws/movement speed their a ground to ground armored unit that has no range so i think the buff was good. i dunno about the broodlords getting buffer tho as they're fine imo as they are.
Sure, but the problem in my opinion is that stalkers already arn't cost effective against roaches, and you can't kite as roaches are faster. with a range upgrade, I suppose tosses will have to get mass immortal or something.. so if the zerg goes hydra / roach, with extra range on roaches, we'll have to get immortal / collosus.. I'll be all like "ok man hang on, no fighting for 45 minutes so I can get my army out, okay?" roach range wont be a huge deal in ZvT though I don't think, as marauders are awesome anyway.
My main race is not Protoss, but in a Protoss v.s Terran match, Protoss has hard time dealing with Terran, so I’m disappointed that a fix for this issue was not part of the patch.
Because this is completely opposite of what Blizzard implies in their patch blog:
Win % in Diamond (accounting for player skill)
49.6% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 52.8% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 49.6% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Platinum (accounting for player skill)
56.3% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 47.3% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 44.5% win for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Gold (accounting for player skill)
61.0% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 61.1% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 49.5% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Silver (accounting for player skill)
63.6% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 50.7% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 51.6% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Bronze (accounting for player skill)
59.0% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 55.1% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 45.4% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
As you can see there are some issues with protoss vs. terran in many of the leagues. From our own play experience, as well as feedback from the community, this matches pretty closely with what we're already aware of. We're working on solutions.
So they're saying it's the Terrans having issues vs Protoss. If this is was correct translation then I can safely ignore all of Fruitdealer's opinions from now on knowing I'm not missing much.
My main race is not Protoss, but in a Protoss v.s Terran match, Protoss has hard time dealing with Terran, so I’m disappointed that a fix for this issue was not part of the patch.
Because this is completely opposite of what Blizzard implies in their patch blog:
49.6% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 52.8% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 49.6% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Platinum (accounting for player skill)
56.3% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 47.3% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 44.5% win for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Gold (accounting for player skill)
61.0% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 61.1% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 49.5% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Silver (accounting for player skill)
63.6% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 50.7% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 51.6% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Bronze (accounting for player skilco
59.0% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 55.1% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 45.4% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
As you can see there are some issues with protoss vs. terran in many of the leagues. From our own play experience, as well as feedback from the community, this matches pretty closely with what we're already aware of. We're working on solutions.
So they're saying it's the Terrans having issues vs Protoss. If this is was correct translation then I can safely ignore all of Fruitdealer's opinions from now on knowing I'm not missing much.
Ladder win rates and balence have no correlation. The match finding mechanism tries to make every player have a 50% win rate.
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.
On October 14 2010 04:48 Mintastic wrote: Are you sure you translated this correctly?
My main race is not Protoss, but in a Protoss v.s Terran match, Protoss has hard time dealing with Terran, so I’m disappointed that a fix for this issue was not part of the patch.
Because this is completely opposite of what Blizzard implies in their patch blog:
Win % in Diamond (accounting for player skill)
49.6% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 52.8% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 49.6% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Platinum (accounting for player skill)
56.3% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 47.3% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 44.5% win for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Gold (accounting for player skill)
61.0% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 61.1% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 49.5% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Silver (accounting for player skill)
63.6% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 50.7% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 51.6% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Bronze (accounting for player skilco
59.0% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 55.1% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 45.4% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
As you can see there are some issues with protoss vs. terran in many of the leagues. From our own play experience, as well as feedback from the community, this matches pretty closely with what we're already aware of. We're working on solutions.
So they're saying it's the Terrans having issues vs Protoss. If this is was correct translation then I can safely ignore all of Fruitdealer's opinions from now on knowing I'm not missing much.
Ladder win rates and balence have no correlation. The match finding mechanism tries to make every player have a 50% win rate.
"These numbers take individual player skill into account, which helps to avoid the 50% win/loss percentage effect that the matchmaking system can impart on straight win/loss ratios."
It's okay, Blizzard actually knows what they're doing unlike most of us.
On October 13 2010 17:21 Severedevil wrote: In BW, the Hive offers Adrenal Glands, Defilers, Devourers, Guardians, Ultralisks, and level 3 upgrades.
In SC2, the Hive offers Broodlords, Ultralisks, and level 3 upgrades. (Adrenal Glands sucks now.) That's far less incentive to build a Hive, particularly against Terran since Vikings tend to negate capital ships.
Perhaps we could fill that gap by buffing Adrenal Glands, bringing back Lurker Aspect as a tier 3 research for the Hydralisk, and giving Queens and/or Overseers an ability that requires Hive to research? Zerg is never getting the defiler back; a unit that ridiculously efficient can't coexist with Zerg's new macro mechanic that allows a Hatchery + a Queen to produce nearly as many larva as three BW hatcheries. (Zerglings had to be nerfed for the same reason.) But perhaps Zerg's backup spellcasters can bear some of the spellcasting burden.
Are you fucking retarded? Ultralisks own. Have any of you actually played good zergs? When they get an expo up its pretty fucking hard as a terran. Fruitdealer thoroughly raped one of if not the best terrans in the world and we still have people bitching about brining back lurkers and shit
- _-
Fungal owns vikings. If your Brood Lords are dying to them fungal and then hydra or corruptor.
Stop bitching.
rainbow didnt abuse any of the things that makes terran good vs zerg, you cant reference that series for anything ya if z gets up an econ unmolested its strong, but that should never, ever happen.
Um, didn't he do the tank drop that you whined about when you got dominated by it? Didn't you ask your opponent to apologize to you because you seemed to think it was unbeatable?
So tell us what the PROPER terran opening is vs. zerg, since apparently Rainbow has no idea how to play against them.
he completely fucked up the one on lt, he made a 2nd tank and waited for it but then didnt take it, brought scvs instead, meaning he only had 1 tank on the cliff, but it was at the time when he should have had 2 tanks, letting cool get the mutas up in time to not take real damage. and tank drop is just a bad opening on kulas since the one cliff is too small for the tanks to abuse and the other cliff is ground accessible if you kill the rocks. on desert he was completely passive until cool had 4 bases up and on scrap station he managed to lose reapers to slow lings, also the decision to make a 2nd forward barracks without walling was utterly retarded. so when he did do pressure he did it horribly, tank drop can be good, proxy rax reaper is good vs fast expo.. but not when you fuck it up. hellion or hellion drop openings are more dependable though, they'll almost always require a bigger investment to defend than they do to execute and theyre almost completely safe. but theres literally 20+ viable aggressive openings terran can use vs zerg.
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.
On October 13 2010 17:21 Severedevil wrote: In BW, the Hive offers Adrenal Glands, Defilers, Devourers, Guardians, Ultralisks, and level 3 upgrades.
In SC2, the Hive offers Broodlords, Ultralisks, and level 3 upgrades. (Adrenal Glands sucks now.) That's far less incentive to build a Hive, particularly against Terran since Vikings tend to negate capital ships.
Perhaps we could fill that gap by buffing Adrenal Glands, bringing back Lurker Aspect as a tier 3 research for the Hydralisk, and giving Queens and/or Overseers an ability that requires Hive to research? Zerg is never getting the defiler back; a unit that ridiculously efficient can't coexist with Zerg's new macro mechanic that allows a Hatchery + a Queen to produce nearly as many larva as three BW hatcheries. (Zerglings had to be nerfed for the same reason.) But perhaps Zerg's backup spellcasters can bear some of the spellcasting burden.
Are you fucking retarded? Ultralisks own. Have any of you actually played good zergs? When they get an expo up its pretty fucking hard as a terran. Fruitdealer thoroughly raped one of if not the best terrans in the world and we still have people bitching about brining back lurkers and shit
- _-
Fungal owns vikings. If your Brood Lords are dying to them fungal and then hydra or corruptor.
Stop bitching.
rainbow didnt abuse any of the things that makes terran good vs zerg, you cant reference that series for anything ya if z gets up an econ unmolested its strong, but that should never, ever happen.
Um, didn't he do the tank drop that you whined about when you got dominated by it? Didn't you ask your opponent to apologize to you because you seemed to think it was unbeatable?
So tell us what the PROPER terran opening is vs. zerg, since apparently Rainbow has no idea how to play against them.
he completely fucked up the one on lt, he made a 2nd tank and waited for it but then didnt take it, brought scvs instead, meaning he only had 1 tank on the cliff, but it was at the time when he should have had 2 tanks, letting cool get the mutas up in time to not take real damage. and tank drop is just a bad opening on kulas since the one cliff is too small for the tanks to abuse and the other cliff is ground accessible if you kill the rocks. on desert he was completely passive until cool had 4 bases up and on scrap station he managed to lose reapers to slow lings, also the decision to make a 2nd forward barracks without walling was utterly retarded. so when he did do pressure he did it horribly, tank drop can be good, proxy rax reaper is good vs fast expo.. but not when you fuck it up. hellion or hellion drop openings are more dependable though, they'll almost always require a bigger investment to defend than they do to execute and theyre almost completely safe. but theres literally 20+ viable aggressive openings terran can use vs zerg.
So Idra... in the upcoming GSL will we be seeing more proxy/hidden expo scouting by you?
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.
On October 13 2010 10:05 Str1keFreedom wrote: My main race is not Protoss, but in a Protoss v.s Terran match, Protoss has hard time dealing with Terran, so I’m disappointed that a fix for this issue was not part of the patch.
MARRY ME FRUITDEALER
ROFL
I hope roach doesnt become op by range buff...i think it has now range of 5, same as marine?
No.. it has range 3. It's almost a melee unit, and the attack animation is so slow that it's very hard to kite and micro with. It might get range 4 if Blizzard stick with their plan. Definitely not getting range 5.
My main race is not Protoss, but in a Protoss v.s Terran match, Protoss has hard time dealing with Terran, so I’m disappointed that a fix for this issue was not part of the patch.
Because this is completely opposite of what Blizzard implies in their patch blog:
49.6% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 52.8% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 49.6% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Platinum (accounting for player skill)
56.3% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 47.3% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 44.5% win for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Gold (accounting for player skill)
61.0% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 61.1% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 49.5% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Silver (accounting for player skill)
63.6% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 50.7% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 51.6% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Bronze (accounting for player skill)
59.0% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 55.1% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 45.4% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
As you can see there are some issues with protoss vs. terran in many of the leagues. From our own play experience, as well as feedback from the community, this matches pretty closely with what we're already aware of. We're working on solutions.
So they're saying it's the Terrans having issues vs Protoss. If this is was correct translation then I can safely ignore all of Fruitdealer's opinions from now on knowing I'm not missing much.
1. that's for ladder.. none really cares about ladder 2. it's the NA ladder.. none whatsoever cares about the NA ladder ^^
Very nice to see zerg winning. I do agree with fruitdealer that the PvT matchups have not been improved. They are my worst match ups and it constantly feels like Tier 1 protoss units have little options vs. terran tier 1. I do love it when I get high templars though, they feast on marines .
On October 14 2010 04:48 Mintastic wrote: Are you sure you translated this correctly?
My main race is not Protoss, but in a Protoss v.s Terran match, Protoss has hard time dealing with Terran, so I’m disappointed that a fix for this issue was not part of the patch.
Because this is completely opposite of what Blizzard implies in their patch blog:
Win % in Diamond (accounting for player skill)
49.6% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 52.8% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 49.6% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Platinum (accounting for player skill)
56.3% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 47.3% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 44.5% win for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Gold (accounting for player skill)
61.0% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 61.1% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 49.5% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Silver (accounting for player skill)
63.6% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 50.7% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 51.6% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Bronze (accounting for player skill)
59.0% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 55.1% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 45.4% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
As you can see there are some issues with protoss vs. terran in many of the leagues. From our own play experience, as well as feedback from the community, this matches pretty closely with what we're already aware of. We're working on solutions.
So they're saying it's the Terrans having issues vs Protoss. If this is was correct translation then I can safely ignore all of Fruitdealer's opinions from now on knowing I'm not missing much.
1. that's for ladder.. none really cares about ladder 2. it's the NA ladder.. none whatsoever cares about the NA ladder ^^
1. Blizzard cares, no one else matters. 2. See above.
On October 14 2010 04:48 Mintastic wrote: Are you sure you translated this correctly?
My main race is not Protoss, but in a Protoss v.s Terran match, Protoss has hard time dealing with Terran, so I’m disappointed that a fix for this issue was not part of the patch.
Because this is completely opposite of what Blizzard implies in their patch blog:
Win % in Diamond (accounting for player skill)
49.6% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 52.8% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 49.6% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Platinum (accounting for player skill)
56.3% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 47.3% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 44.5% win for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Gold (accounting for player skill)
61.0% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 61.1% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 49.5% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Silver (accounting for player skill)
63.6% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 50.7% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 51.6% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Bronze (accounting for player skill)
59.0% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 55.1% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 45.4% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
As you can see there are some issues with protoss vs. terran in many of the leagues. From our own play experience, as well as feedback from the community, this matches pretty closely with what we're already aware of. We're working on solutions.
So they're saying it's the Terrans having issues vs Protoss. If this is was correct translation then I can safely ignore all of Fruitdealer's opinions from now on knowing I'm not missing much.
1. that's for ladder.. none really cares about ladder 2. it's the NA ladder.. none whatsoever cares about the NA ladder ^^
1. Blizzard cares, no one else matters. 2. See above.
yeah sure, but I wouldn't say that protoss is overpowered because we have a 60% win ratio in the NA bronze league.. specially as it's on 49 in diamond.. also if you actually read the notes they're not nerfing protoss the slightest.. they dont really care about us. imho the marauder and the viking should get a slight nerf, and maybe buff the carrier a little bit.. dunno.. those just give complete air and ground domination against protoss. other than that i like the setup very much, and it's not like i'm forced to play protoss. how do you make a nested quote by the way?
On October 13 2010 10:45 Grond wrote: If BroodLords, Carriers and BC's all suck vs Terran, it's more likely the problem is the Viking and not all 3 of those units.
The viking imo IS a problem. I think the game can be balanced with the viking the way it is, but i'd really prefer a change to this unit. Its range just feels so unnatural. I'm pretty sure what happened was, the collosus has range, so they gave the viking range too, and then nerfed it in speed to make up for it. Now the viking is super slow and boring. If the viking had acceptable range, and was fast in both movement AND transformation then we would see some sweet viking micro.
This being said, i understand why blizzard gave it so much range, making me think that the collossus is another problem. Its so easy to micro it and has super long range and fries everything. If it wasn't for vikings, they would demolish terran. Sure in bw the reaver was super effective, but it was SUPER slow, requiring a dropship and a LOT of micro.
Not to mention, collosi are huge and block vision of your own units underneath. Really not a spectator friendly unit. If it was removed and replaced with something else, i wouldnt miss it.
On October 13 2010 10:45 Grond wrote: If BroodLords, Carriers and BC's all suck vs Terran, it's more likely the problem is the Viking and not all 3 of those units.
The viking imo IS a problem. I think the game can be balanced with the viking the way it is, but i'd really prefer a change to this unit. Its range just feels so unnatural. I'm pretty sure what happened was, the collosus has range, so they gave the viking range too, and then nerfed it in speed to make up for it. Now the viking is super slow and boring. If the viking had acceptable range, and was fast in both movement AND transformation then we would see some sweet viking micro.
This being said, i understand why blizzard gave it so much range, making me think that the collossus is another problem. Its so easy to micro it and has super long range and fries everything. If it wasn't for vikings, they would demolish terran. Sure in bw the reaver was super effective, but it was SUPER slow, requiring a dropship and a LOT of micro.
Not to mention, collosi are huge and block vision of your own units underneath. Really not a spectator friendly unit. If it was removed and replaced with something else, i wouldnt miss it.
speaking of easy to micro.. terran MMM 1A enemy base - win. I wouldn't mind it being replaced, but in that case remove the marauder and the viking too. marauders own collosi anyway.. not to mention that they also own high templars, zealots, stalkers, sentries, immortals, and all buildings. collosi and storms are good against marines.. that's it.
Patch 1.2 is a joke. Reapers are already next to useless because of the 5 second nerf. IMO, there are too many 'fixes' that are going to be implemented at one time. Try increasing roach range first, or try supply depot before barracks first, don't go "HOLY SHIT REAPERS IMBA" and then throw 30 nerfs at them. Blizzard. you lose.
As a complete newb to the game, and someone trying to learn the races, I have found zerg to be the most complex to learn. Terran are very simple, they have fewer hotkeys to worry about. Terran need to be able to push out units a little quick at the beggining as zerg produce zerglings SO quickly and protos zealots own marines (from what i've seen in my limited experience) as they have shields and can deal out damage quickly.
Zerg are killed VERY quickly by protos, I agree on that, however I don't think the ZvT matchup is unbalanced if you know how to play zerg properly. I've watched so many replays online from pro matches where zerg has owned terran, just as many as terran owning zerg.
I also agree that there are less zerg players, for whatever the reason, which is why less got into the top 200. Hellion harassment is just as viable as reaper harassment, same as zealot harassment and speedling/roach harassment.
I agree that needing a factory to get the upgrade makes sense, and the increase in roach range, however this thing about supply before rax is absolutely rediculous. This basically prevents any sort of chance to stop the early expansion from zerg. That in itself is going to make zerg so OP'd that everyone is going to switch and then in 6 months the "new thing" will be asking for protoss to be upgraded, and then back to Terran. Terran have already been nerfed huge in the last patch.
On October 14 2010 04:48 Mintastic wrote: Are you sure you translated this correctly?
My main race is not Protoss, but in a Protoss v.s Terran match, Protoss has hard time dealing with Terran, so I’m disappointed that a fix for this issue was not part of the patch.
Because this is completely opposite of what Blizzard implies in their patch blog:
Win % in Diamond (accounting for player skill)
49.6% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 52.8% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 49.6% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Platinum (accounting for player skill)
56.3% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 47.3% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 44.5% win for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Gold (accounting for player skill)
61.0% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 61.1% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 49.5% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Silver (accounting for player skill)
63.6% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 50.7% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 51.6% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Bronze (accounting for player skill)
59.0% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran. 55.1% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg. 45.4% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
As you can see there are some issues with protoss vs. terran in many of the leagues. From our own play experience, as well as feedback from the community, this matches pretty closely with what we're already aware of. We're working on solutions.
So they're saying it's the Terrans having issues vs Protoss. If this is was correct translation then I can safely ignore all of Fruitdealer's opinions from now on knowing I'm not missing much.
1. that's for ladder.. none really cares about ladder 2. it's the NA ladder.. none whatsoever cares about the NA ladder ^^
1. Blizzard cares, no one else matters. 2. See above.
yeah sure, but I wouldn't say that protoss is overpowered because we have a 60% win ratio in the NA bronze league.. specially as it's on 49 in diamond.. also if you actually read the notes they're not nerfing protoss the slightest.. they dont really care about us. imho the marauder and the viking should get a slight nerf, and maybe buff the carrier a little bit.. dunno.. those just give complete air and ground domination against protoss. other than that i like the setup very much, and it's not like i'm forced to play protoss. how do you make a nested quote by the way?
If you read the notes they mention that they're working on solutions, not necessarily addressing it with the next patch. Fixing the zerg is probably their higher priority right now.
You make nested quotes by using quote tags inside other quotes.
Zerg needs a unit like hi templar? Fungal growth > Psi Storm... Any well placed fungals or NPs can easily turn the tide of a battle. That being said, good to see Z isn't completely helpless to early game terran anymore
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.
Calm down, they were just asking how he felt about it... it's not like Blizzard came to him for direction on balance.
Some funny points I have to make about this: "Zerg need units like the high templar" Zerg can literally have the high templar in their arsenal, just neural parasite one...or two or a colossus. ALSO the point about zerg having horrible scouting... How can anyone say that? Are you kidding me they have some if not ThE best scouting in the game... They have overlords..burrow..mutalisk..zergling.... (Practically flying supply depots and/or pylons) that can be used for scouting all over the map.( Think Fruit-seller spotting every one of IntotheRainbows drop's because of scattered overlords) Zerg are the only units able to spot a drop immediately because they have overlords all over the outsides of the map. They also have zerglings which are the most inexpensive/fast unit in the game to spread and/or burrow all over the map and put on all the xel naga towers. Lets not forget overseers whose initial line of sight is huge, plus they have the ability to make change-lings and stop units/upgrades with its abilities. Zerg can make an overseer out of an already available overlord which is there already from supply necessity's(think changing a pylon/supply depot into something useful?) and why does no one use spore colonies for detection?
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.
-I think they should go with either the supply depot before rax or the factory before nitro... probably not both. But I'd go with factory before nitro. Yeah Protoss have to make a pylon before a gateway, but zealots are beasts in the earliest stages of the game and that makes up for it long enough to get stalkers/sentries? Fac before nitro means that roach speed has a bit more time to finish before 5rr speed. I think that nerfing quick tech to reaper speed will probably balance out early game for both tvz and tvp.
-broodlords: pick ONLY ONE: increase movement speed, increase health, quicker morph, or make em cheaper.
-thanks blizz for fg stopping blink... blinking out of fg is ghey
-thanks blizz for zerg tech buildings getting tougher, so marauder drops don't insta kill all zerg tech
imo, balance out 1v1 first and then keep the base game the same while balancing out teamplay mechanics. 3v3 and 4v4 are basically like FFA in terms of how much your personal skill level determines the outcome of the match, so don't worry about them being too balanced imo. Please bring back team melee from scbw.
Blizzard: Do 3 patches (one for early game, one for midgame, and one for endgame) and then give it time. Allow the game to balance itself out a little bit before making anymore changes (aside from debugging or UI changes- chat lobbies pl0x)
DISCLAIMER: I wholeheartedly believe that the balancing team at Blizzard knows what they're doing far better than any of us shitheads. Just because you spend 16/day hours on sc2 doesn't mean you know anything about balancing. (Myself included of course, though i'm lucky to even play an hour a day.) THIS IS ALL IMHO
On October 13 2010 10:05 Str1keFreedom wrote: Q: The patch notes for patch 1.2 have been revealed. What are your thoughts on its boost for Zerg? I heard about the patch and I welcome it. I’m not exactly sure what will happen until the patch is done. I think I’ll be able to decide how I feel about it once it is released. My main race is not Protoss, but in a Protoss v.s Terran match, Protoss has hard time dealing with Terran, so I’m disappointed that a fix for this issue was not part of the patch.
Damn right!!! Seems that I have to play twice as good as the Terrans while they can make mistakes and I need prefect forcefields to havea chance vs an early push.
I do wonder how Zerg will play in this patch, hopefully a great deal more changes will be included including chat rooms.
On October 14 2010 11:17 zoogaezee wrote: ALSO the point about zerg having horrible scouting... How can anyone say that? Are you kidding me they have some if not ThE best scouting in the game...
Obviously that is talking about early game, duh. Lategame scouting options are perfectly fine.
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![[image loading]](http://bbs.gamechosun.co.kr/wlwl_upload/dataroom/star2/2010/10/829201_1286530938.jpg)
