|
This thread is for discussing the games, not crying about balance. Thanks. |
On March 01 2011 10:53 1Eris1 wrote:
You guys can speculate all you want, but when it comes down to it, this is the 2nd time in a row he has been knocked out in ro.32 in Code A. It doesn't even matter if they were two good players because he would have ended up playing other good players if he got deep in Code A.
Actually, the "bad luck" complaint is legitimate to some extent because you only need to win two best-of-threes to enter the up/down matches. Ret could have had an easier opponent, then win one more round, then take his chances in up/down. Thus, it is entirely possible to avoid the best code A players and defeat weak code S players to earn code S.
|
On March 01 2011 09:10 Raidern wrote:
anyone saying ret is overrated is clueless about the game, really.
the guy just won the finnish tournament, give him some more time
there were a shitload of jerks who said jinro was overrated and that he didn't belong to korea back then when he failed to qualify to gsl a couple of times.
think about what you are about to type, really.
Jinro wasn't good enough when he failed to qualify for the first two GSL's. Even Artosis said this after watching Jinro play during the qualifying rounds back then. However, he's made a huge improvement since then and that is why he is getting excellent results in the biggest SC2 tournament. I'd even go ahead and say that he belongs in the top 5 in the world at this moment.
"He sucks and doesn't belong in Korea" is obviously harsh and unwarranted, but I don't see anything wrong with saying that a player currently is overrated and not quite good enough to do well in GSL.
|
Really enjoyed Kellytosis today. Definitely nothing Tasteless about that.
|
Ouch, just finished watching Ret v whoever the other guy was.
I'm no longer watching any more TvZs. I don't care about balance, i care about entertainment and i'm no longer receiving that anymore from this matchup. It's frustrating viewing and i have better things to do with my life. Clearly these Zerg players just aren't up to scratch so i shall no longer support them by watching any of their matches. Except July. He's aware he needs to shake things up and play cheesy in order to get anywhere, which is great. Cost us MVP though, but so what? I want to see players win and have a fighting chance doing so, and the playstyle of a July (Kyrix too fingers crossed) allows for this.
All of that said i did 4/4 in my liquibet today so i'm feeling pretty good. And Kelly is doing great. Although the first couple of minutes it was like she didn't want to say anything. I think she was starstruck sitting next to Artosis. He's so manly and masculine so i can't blame her. Could cut the tension with a knife.
Loved the Ghost play by the guy who beat Maka too. Always fills me with immense joy seeing an underused unit used in a prominent role. It bothers me from a 'state of the game' perspective to see units relegated to niches even if that is their intended design. For a guy to open with 3 ghosts, to me that's pretty cool. Even if it was a specific anti-Banshee opening on that map. I really liked it. Great entertainment.
COME ON HUK.
|
On March 01 2011 15:46 Goibon wrote:
Loved the Ghost play by the guy who beat Maka too. Always fills me with immense joy seeing an underused unit used in a prominent role. It bothers me from a 'state of the game' perspective to see units relegated to niches even if that is their intended design. For a guy to open with 3 ghosts, to me that's pretty cool. Even if it was a specific anti-Banshee opening on that map. I really liked it. Great entertainment.
COME ON HUK.
MVP Noblesse actually looked quite excellent vs Maka. Although it is hard to say if Maka just made him look good, I am not sure I have seen Maka play a good game in like 3-4 months now.... I think that Ghost opening could've failed badly if Maka tech switched/cancelled his investment after Noblesse saw him going Banshee and cloak.
|
Ret had a GREAT upper hand, but he threw it away. When he was attacking the planetary, HE TRHEW AWAY 4 fungal growths on perfectly good marines, but he threw it away and the marines stimmed in and killed all the broodlords. Great macro play, but poor micro.
|
Just watched yesterdays match. Ret lost exactly the same way every zerg is losing to terran at the moment. In fact that match could've been any other TvZ in the GSL with the exception of Julys - they have all progressed almost exactly the same and mostly gotten to exactly the same point with exactly the same result.
The matchup is completely stale at the moment, which is a tragedy.
Once it reaches 200/200 zergs haven't figured out a combination that can beat the sheer power of marine/tank. These new maps are working out amazing for terrans playing a very safe game with constant medivac harass.
I hope the few zergs left in the tourney can show us some creative new strategies, because muta/bling is not working. And the matches will be less excruciatingly boring/samey. The onus is on zergs, terrans aren't going to change a winning formula.
Sidenote - I hope Ret continues to stay on in Korea despite what must've been another big disappointment.
|
|
|
I don't want to sound like a jerk; but if Terran and Protoss lategame is beating Zerg lategame, isn't that a good reason for Zerg to stop trying to win the lategame?
Almost every game on terminus, for example, the Terran/Protoss simply double expand with the Zerg and hence is able to produce as many workers/minute as Zerg does. Sure Zerg has a lot of larva from 3hatches, but by the time you get 2-3 nexus/orbital commands the main thing prevnting saturation is minerals.
It's also a change in the rate of unit production. Big maps are forcing all the races to FE so the metagame is normalizing so that terran and Protoss has double or triple the worker production from the previous metagame. Zerg on the other hand has a 50% increase in worker production at best and only if they double expand early. Since Protoss and Terran can safely FE due to map size, they don't turtle in fear of zergling runbys anymore. Their worker production and Econ skyrockets while Zerg remains back in the stone age. Zerg was losing before when Terran and Protoss would 1-2 base, zerg's advantage was Econ. Econ is now the same and people are surprised that Zerg are losing in the big maps.
|
On March 01 2011 13:24 Sein wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2011 09:10 Raidern wrote:
anyone saying ret is overrated is clueless about the game, really.
the guy just won the finnish tournament, give him some more time
there were a shitload of jerks who said jinro was overrated and that he didn't belong to korea back then when he failed to qualify to gsl a couple of times.
think about what you are about to type, really. Jinro wasn't good enough when he failed to qualify for the first two GSL's. Even Artosis said this after watching Jinro play during the qualifying rounds back then. However, he's made a huge improvement since then and that is why he is getting excellent results in the biggest SC2 tournament. I'd even go ahead and say that he belongs in the top 5 in the world at this moment. "He sucks and doesn't belong in Korea" is obviously harsh and unwarranted, but I don't see anything wrong with saying that a player currently is overrated and not quite good enough to do well in GSL.
You don't go from overrated and not quite good enough to ro4 between seasons. The breaks aren't that long.
|
On March 02 2011 01:51 nam nam wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2011 13:24 Sein wrote:On March 01 2011 09:10 Raidern wrote:
anyone saying ret is overrated is clueless about the game, really.
the guy just won the finnish tournament, give him some more time
there were a shitload of jerks who said jinro was overrated and that he didn't belong to korea back then when he failed to qualify to gsl a couple of times.
think about what you are about to type, really. Jinro wasn't good enough when he failed to qualify for the first two GSL's. Even Artosis said this after watching Jinro play during the qualifying rounds back then. However, he's made a huge improvement since then and that is why he is getting excellent results in the biggest SC2 tournament. I'd even go ahead and say that he belongs in the top 5 in the world at this moment. "He sucks and doesn't belong in Korea" is obviously harsh and unwarranted, but I don't see anything wrong with saying that a player currently is overrated and not quite good enough to do well in GSL. You don't go from overrated and not quite good enough to ro4 between seasons. The breaks aren't that long.
But you do actually!
In the upper ranks, the assumption is that mechanics are very very close to each other so that people don't lose all the time just because they forgot to use their gateways enough. The mechanics are good enough that you remember *most* of your injects.
At that point, the main difficulty, the main thing stopping you from progressing is not mechanics but awareness of the metagame. You will lose because your ability to assimilate scouting information isn't that good, you lose because you're not making the right tactical and strategic counters (I will assume that you are making the right unit counters).
Once you "figure out" how the metagame works, then all of a sudden you go from zero to hero in the span of a season. That takes a lot of playtime and experience to figure out how the rhythm of the game is working. Without that experience to help you stay calm, collected, and aware of the metagame, too often you'll end up having fear or nerves dictate your gameplay instead of your actual *skill*.
|
Kinda hard for zerg to dominate late game TvZ when A) they need to have big economic advantage and B) mules cost no supply yet mine at the rate of what, 4 workers? When zerg loses it's either because "T/P was turtled, you shouldve taken over the map! Take 4/5 bases!" OR "Zerg overdroned! they took 4/5 hatches with 100 drones, of COURSE they didn't have an army to compete".
So what, Zerg either has to have an improper economy to remax/trade/etc... with Terran and Toss's superior army or their limited supply prevents them from fielding an army that can put a dent in a terran or toss deathball? And how do they prevent this, harass? Harass a turtling player with his army at home along with turrets or the ability to warp units anywhere? sorry for the QQ, just some of the hypocritical BS thrown at Z players is ridiculous. Ret outplayed his korean opponent, not by a ton, but he outplayed him. He didn't play perfect though... so.... he lost....
|
On March 02 2011 02:30 tskarzyn wrote:
Kinda hard for zerg to dominate late game TvZ when A) they need to have big economic advantage and B) mules cost no supply yet mine at the rate of what, 4 workers? When zerg loses it's either because "T/P was turtled, you shouldve taken over the map! Take 4/5 bases!" OR "Zerg overdroned! they took 4/5 hatches with 100 drones, of COURSE they didn't have an army to compete".
So what, Zerg either has to have an improper economy to remax/trade/etc... with Terran and Toss's superior army or their limited supply prevents them from fielding an army that can put a dent in a terran or toss deathball? And how do they prevent this, harass? Harass a turtling player with his army at home along with turrets or the ability to warp units anywhere? sorry for the QQ, just some of the hypocritical BS thrown at Z players is ridiculous. Ret outplayed his korean opponent, not by a ton, but he outplayed him. He didn't play perfect though... so.... he lost....
Which is probably why Zerg should probably stop trying to go so heavy macro.
|
Thanks CuteMvP for erasing Maka from televised starcraft 2. I hated that guy and I'm a team MvP fanboy.
|
On March 01 2011 11:03 andrea20 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2011 10:53 1Eris1 wrote:
You guys can speculate all you want, but when it comes down to it, this is the 2nd time in a row he has been knocked out in ro.32 in Code A. It doesn't even matter if they were two good players because he would have ended up playing other good players if he got deep in Code A. Actually, the "bad luck" complaint is legitimate to some extent because you only need to win two best-of-threes to enter the up/down matches. Ret could have had an easier opponent, then win one more round, then take his chances in up/down. Thus, it is entirely possible to avoid the best code A players and defeat weak code S players to earn code S.
Not true. Remember that the guys that get the furthest into code A get to pick their Code S opponents first. The guy that wins code A picks the weakest code S player he can think of, so does the no. 2 of code A, and finally at the end, the people that went out first. Especially this season, with so many Code S heavyweights dropping out, the people going out early in code A will not be getting weak players. The guys loosing the next code A round will be facing the likes of MVP, Top, Nestea, etc.
|
On March 02 2011 02:41 lorkac wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2011 02:30 tskarzyn wrote:
Kinda hard for zerg to dominate late game TvZ when A) they need to have big economic advantage and B) mules cost no supply yet mine at the rate of what, 4 workers? When zerg loses it's either because "T/P was turtled, you shouldve taken over the map! Take 4/5 bases!" OR "Zerg overdroned! they took 4/5 hatches with 100 drones, of COURSE they didn't have an army to compete".
So what, Zerg either has to have an improper economy to remax/trade/etc... with Terran and Toss's superior army or their limited supply prevents them from fielding an army that can put a dent in a terran or toss deathball? And how do they prevent this, harass? Harass a turtling player with his army at home along with turrets or the ability to warp units anywhere? sorry for the QQ, just some of the hypocritical BS thrown at Z players is ridiculous. Ret outplayed his korean opponent, not by a ton, but he outplayed him. He didn't play perfect though... so.... he lost.... Which is probably why Zerg should probably stop trying to go so heavy macro.
I think of all of zerg players would love if their was an alternative. The strengths of zerg is tech switching and quick production. Basically heavy macro. But if you have an alternative strategy that works I'd love to know?
|
On March 02 2011 03:16 1Eris1 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2011 02:41 lorkac wrote:On March 02 2011 02:30 tskarzyn wrote:
Kinda hard for zerg to dominate late game TvZ when A) they need to have big economic advantage and B) mules cost no supply yet mine at the rate of what, 4 workers? When zerg loses it's either because "T/P was turtled, you shouldve taken over the map! Take 4/5 bases!" OR "Zerg overdroned! they took 4/5 hatches with 100 drones, of COURSE they didn't have an army to compete".
So what, Zerg either has to have an improper economy to remax/trade/etc... with Terran and Toss's superior army or their limited supply prevents them from fielding an army that can put a dent in a terran or toss deathball? And how do they prevent this, harass? Harass a turtling player with his army at home along with turrets or the ability to warp units anywhere? sorry for the QQ, just some of the hypocritical BS thrown at Z players is ridiculous. Ret outplayed his korean opponent, not by a ton, but he outplayed him. He didn't play perfect though... so.... he lost.... Which is probably why Zerg should probably stop trying to go so heavy macro. I think of all of zerg players would love if their was an alternative. The strengths of zerg is tech switching and quick production. Basically heavy macro. But if you have an alternative strategy that works I'd love to know?
First off, the zerg econ needs to be re-evaluated.
The current goal of zerg econ is "I need more drones than he has workers!"
And then Zerg complain that they don't have enough gas to support all these awesome tech units they have and they end up having several thousand minerals build up.
Well that's an easy fix, you obviously need to make more zerglings...
except the larva mechanic limits your unit production so that you're really forced to build large clumps of 1-2 unit types at a time and you can't just have 5-6 barrack's with 10-12 marines in the cue sucking up your minerals. (hence why Jinro, the MacroTerran, said that marines are free)
What does this mean?
This means that the larva production of 3-4 hatcheries and queens cannot match the mineral income of 3-4 bases while still building the units it needs.
What does that mean? It means you have too many drones mining minerals.
Is there another solution other than "make less workers? how about build more hatcheries!"
And that is a possibility. You match your production to your income to allow you to have maximum efficiency. Which most zergs do. In-base hatches are very common. Why have less when you can have more right?
So most zerg try to have it all. Lots of hatcheries, lots of income, the ability to build 10 ultralisks in one go, 12 mutalisks in one go, etc...
What ends up happening?
You have 80-90 supply of drones, another 10 supply of queens and only 100~ supply worth of army while your opponent with their 70~ supply of workers is sporting a 130~ supply army.
The "zerg" end up having 30% less dudes on the field than their opponents while maxed. Wait a minute...
What's 30% of 200? (60)
What's 200 supply minus 60 supply? (140)
You mean to tell me that a maxed out zerg army today is as big as a terran or toss at 140-150~ supply?
Wait a minute, doesn't chokes and aoe like tanks and collosus and templars and hellions negate that numbers advantage?
Doesn't that mean that a max supply zerg army is essentially fighting an army that is effectively twice it's size? And why is that? Because zerg gets 90 drones and 4-6 queens while the opponent stops around 70 workers. There just isn't any actual room to have 90 drones, 5 queens, 10 ultralisks, Mutalisks, Banelings, Roaches, Infestors and be able to pump 60 zerglings.
Well, why doesn't zerg make less drones then?
Well, if you have less drones, you wouldn't be able to support a lot of hatcheries and queens. So you'll have less bases, and you'll have less queens. You'll be dependent on larva efficiency instead of being dependent on unit efficiency.
You'd have to stop thinking "Oh, he made unit X I should make unit Y" and think more "He is planning X and I only have Y amount of larva, what's the best way to respond?"
It means using more spines, it means using less banelings, it means using infesters more, it means harassing with muta's less (or more, I don't know)
Personally? I would have someone do the type of math Protoss and Terran players have done to figure out how many production facilities a mineral line can afford and tailoring zerg production to how much it can afford instead of finding a way to be able to afford *everything* at once. Which sounds greedy and money-map-ish when said like that, I'm sorry.
I think someone figured out somewhere that you only need like 13 or 15 drones to pump zerglings nonstop from 3 hatcheries and 1 queen? Well what about other units?
If you decided to just max out on Hydralisks, how many drones on mins/gas do you need per hatchery? How about per queen?
Do the math for every unit and use those number to allow you to do a timing push.
But that's just me, what do I know right?
|
My last comment should probably be in another thread lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
