EPTI would have switched to Terran if it weren't so hard. It is hard for me to understand the balance between more production buildings and more units, tech/reactor, expanding. A hatchery that makes everything is just so much easier.
Over-nerfed: Why Zerg dominated Korea. - Page 8
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
sLiniss
United States849 Posts
I would have switched to Terran if it weren't so hard. It is hard for me to understand the balance between more production buildings and more units, tech/reactor, expanding. A hatchery that makes everything is just so much easier. | ||
|
Gretch
Australia27 Posts
| ||
|
Liquid`Nazgul
22427 Posts
On May 17 2010 20:54 Duelist wrote: If some race, and i'm not talking about zerg in specific, or units end up being a little unbalanced for better or for worse, can't they just release a patch to fix that? Lots of games do that kind of balancing long after the game is for sale. They will continue patching for a long time. | ||
|
Wargizmo
Australia1237 Posts
It's a minor point but I gotta agree with the people arguing that if you include warp prism you have to include overlord. There are some pretty sick strategies out there with OLs such as the baneling carpet bomb that are every bit as technical as similar warp prism based tactics. | ||
|
OminouS
Sweden1343 Posts
If I include all P units I have to include the Z's supportunits aswell? Edit: Example: Warp prism. Used to drop units and bring units quicker into battle (with warp in function) Overlord: Used to drop units and bring units quicker into battle (with creep function). Of course the Warp prism is better but the overlord is used about the same amount, if not more often than the warp prism. Usable unit imo. | ||
|
wintergt
Belgium1335 Posts
The same can probably be said about 1 supply roaches. It allowed zerg to macro and get enormous armies. Blizz didn't like that and made them 2 supply. Whether it's an overnerf or not will remain to be seen. But if it is, then buffs should be coming to other units to encourage a more diverse playstyle. Maybe the roach itself will receive some buffs (or stronger upgrades) again. | ||
|
StarStruck
25339 Posts
| ||
MorroW
Sweden3522 Posts
they have 3 air fighters but i wouldnt mind if they added in scourges just for the heck of it they could probably add some kind of hive spellcaster too On May 17 2010 21:15 StarStruck wrote: Almost everything coming out of Artosis' mouth is biased. Most of us know that already. Take it with a grain of salt. ah yes same thing goes for my posts^^ | ||
|
Lollersauce
United States357 Posts
On May 17 2010 21:26 MorroW wrote: i dont think lurkers would fit in since baneling fills their role beautifully without any weaknesses Other than the fact that they're one time use only? Lololol... | ||
|
Takkara
United States2503 Posts
1) The skill level of Zerg players is significantly higher than that of Protoss and Terran. This was also at the heart of the previous argument during the Tester thread that "no good players play Terran or they'd never lose." It's certainly possible that there is a skew of experience towards Zerg at the very top of the Korean ladder. So what? I don't think that Blizzard is looking directly at the results of 6 Korean former pro-gamers and saying "wow, those progamers just keep beating everyone, let's nerf everyone so they're not so good." Blizzard has said they do balance around the top of the ladder, but not necessarily the top 10, or the top 5, or even the top 50. So, there is no logical direct link between an incomplete list of top players in Korea of the 3 races and the state of balance in the game. It's as if, now that these Zerg players are switching to Terran, you could somehow surmise that now Terran will be nerfed heavily simply because good players are now playing them. It's a total red herring. One of those correlation does not imply causality things. 2) The simple quantity of units is solely what makes a race hard to learn. Zerg has slightly less units (though I think you have to include the Overlord [creep spreading during battle], Overseer [scouting and detection], and Queen [defense, transfusion, creep], especially if you include the Observer and Reaper) but is that the sole indication of difficulty curve? It's not like any Protoss players on the ladder are rushing to Carrier or Mothership, either. Maybe that's because they're useless. Maybe that's because they haven't learned them because there are too many units. So, even if the other races' units count higher, the working set is almost the same, meaning the gradient of difficulty shouldn't be so ridiculously wide as to think that the Zerg players have somehow capped potential sooner, while the Terran and Protoss players are still learning so much more. Besides, so many other things make a race complicated, especially with SC2's macro mechanics. The notion of keeping multiple Queens' energy low, while spreading creep, and deciding how to split larva between Drones and units is a whole lot harder than Muling/Scanning or Chrono Boosting. There are a great number of things that go into the complexity of a race, but unit count is not nearly the sole determinant. 3) Blizzard has the potential to be happy with the current state of Zerg. It's just clearly and factually untrue. There is a 0% chance that this current state of balance preservers beyond the next patch. They want to see what this patch does, then they'll make the additional changes they have in the pipe. This patch very likely was an overnerf (I don't want to speak in absolutes about state of balance), but it's not the last patch in this sequence, and Blizzard wants to see what affect it has on the game. So, Zerg is not at an endpoint, or even a point that Blizzard is perfectly asserting that they're "balanced." They want to see what affect the roach nerf has so they can re-evaluate. Proof: + Show Spoiler + From the Patch 12 Situation Report: Please keep in mind that we are continuing to keep a close eye on many of these changes to better gauge their effects and may not apply all of our planned changes into any one patch. This allows us to track the effects a bit better and layer in our planned changes to better set the pace of how they affect balance overall. From post "Just a Reminder on Beta": We're going to shake things up from time to time to see where the chips fall and know that this process is neither perfect nor precise, but in no way is the development team operating in a vacuum or taking balance changes lightly. So, I think it's a decent post, but I don't think the evidence matches the claim. There is no reasonable person that thinks the last patch balanced Zerg. I'm not saying the Roach change won't stand, but I do not think that Zerg is going to stay the same or get worse off. I'll bet they compensate the Roach a bit perhaps in armor again or add the strength elsewhere. PS: For people shushing people away because they think they're scaring of artosis: He's a big boy and can handle himself. He's done a lot for the community and he's an exceptional player, but this isn't his first rodeo, he doesn't need handlers chasing people away so they can hear his decrees without interruption. His opinions carry a ton of weight, and he can defend them himself. He made a post for discussion, let the discussion happen. | ||
|
Izzachar
Sweden285 Posts
But the play of protoss and terran is so vastly different between pro players and silver/gold league players which I am playing against. For Zerg to win in silver+ and even in bronze you MUST expand pretty quickly most times. Terran out macros you on one base and its very hard to get a big enough army to handle protoss and terran on one base (one hatchery). Successful Zerg play boils down to expanding and defending 2 bases pretty early in the game. You could make an in base 2nd hatch, but if you can def NE why not place it there to get the NE in the process. What every protoss and terran player does in bronze -> lower gold gold to counter this is a timing push of one base. If that fails they generally loose, if it succeeds they generally win. They put all their hopes in this one push, even if zerg has perfect counters for their army they still push and hope to win. Instead of using that force to secure an expansion and possibly another shortly after. If they had constant SCV production during this time I see no problem getting that expo saturated really quickly and getting on even terms with zergs in income. Watching pro replays it does take a fairly long time for Zerg to get economic advantage even with FE, especially if pressured a bit early on, forced to make units. I think the "fear" of allowing Zerg to FE is a bit unjust. If you do not pressure sure he can drone up. But simple fear of pressure is enough to make Zerg start spam units and spines. Allowing toss and terran to expand and move workers their without fear of having lower eco. I see different tactics in pro tournaments. Some expo really fast as protoss against zerg as an example. But still there are a lot of timing pushes, committing their whole game into one push to beat Zerg against their wall of spines. If Zerg plays super defense I think toss and terrans only answer is not to play super offense, they can also choose defense along with faking attacks (I think) but you almost never see this. If terran and toss muster up a nice force instead of actually attacking with it just make Zerg believe you are attacking. If Zerg has 8 spines (common answer to attack) going thats 1200! minerals he does not have in a army, its 8 drones less. Toss terran should be able to take expo at this point with superior ground army not having to fear Zergs army in an assault on their own base as Zerg now spent 1.2k mins on static defense. Maybe take middle and set it up with cannons and turrets/bunkers, before Zerg gets his ground army there. As long as you can defend against muta in your base it should be ok, and Zerg is not alone to be able to harass worker lines anyway. If you have middle of map (on those maps where there is a middle choke) Zerg is forced to either harass or attack your army backed up with static defense as you can freely expand. And Zerg cannot afford to let opponent be on equal bases most of the times. This would shift the game from toss terran being forced to attack Zerg to the other way around | ||
|
Count9
China10928 Posts
| ||
|
Ganondorf
Italy600 Posts
 I don't look too much at stats for balance (well i'm against that practice) but the distribution on the asia server is Race distribution, 2000+ rating Zerg ---------- 11 ----- 45.8% Protoss ----- 3 ------- 12.5% Terran ------- 10 ------ 41.7% Which is a little indication that protoss is totally unplayable. | ||
|
MorroW
Sweden3522 Posts
On May 17 2010 21:34 Lollersauce wrote: Other than the fact that they're one time use only? Lololol... ur not analysing it good enough lurkers would only rape mnm on a ramp or by protection would lose hard against them on a flank or vs mech would absolutely demolish anything under swarm lurkers had so many strengths and weaknesses its ridiculous how complex that unit was the baneling can hunt, run. does well on ramp or outside ramp. flank doesnt matter split is impossible (yes it is impossible now move on with ur life plz). it totally rapes bio and its still alot stronger vs hellions than most think. i laff every time a commentator says a guy should make hellion vs banes my point is the lurker was very difficult to use the baneling is very very simple to use and it does everything the lurker does, only better but i guess they needed to make banelings this ridiculous since defiler is gone and muta stack wont give u mapcontrol for shit in the midgame vs t | ||
|
okrane
France265 Posts
The part I find essential is the one about the learning curve. Let's face it. Zerg have the fewest units. Its not even about counting them. Its more about their role and specific niche, and their ability to be incorporated into builds. With a really mediocre corruptor, a bad ultralisk, the zerg suffer even more. The roach nerf shows exactly what I mean. Right now, with roaches rendered useless, the units one has to play with are: Zergling, Baneling, Hydra, Infestor, Mutalisk, Broodlord. That's it: 6 units. The rest are just gimmick units, pigeon-holed into countering a specific unit combo. (Corruptor against Collosus/BC, Ultralisk against massmarineslol) If Starcraft II is going to become the next popular e-sport, it must maintain the most important quality of a sport, in general: which is appealing to the masses to watch. If people dont like watching matches between the pros, there will be no pros, and the game won't be an e-sport. So each race must be able to contain spectacular play: which means unit diversity and complex units. We've already seen army compositions and transitions for the different races. Protoss end-game ground armies are very diversified: Zealot, Sentry, Stalker, Immortal, Collosus. Terran as well: Marine, Marrauder, Medivac, Ghost, as well as Hellion, Marrauder, Thor, Tank, Viking. Zerg end-game army: Hydras lol. While great players, with their fine touch can turn mass hydras (or anything else for that matter) into something enjoyable, after some time, it will get extremely boring, not to mention counterable. The learning curve it simply about this. Mass <Insert unit here> is easily conterable. And the pros will learn eventually how to manage their transitions to conter this simple, but effective play. A race this simple, will become boring Zerg needs more units. Either by introducing some new units into the mix (Lurkers etc), either by spicing up the existant ones (more spells for overseers/infestor, other utility for corruptors, changing the role of the roach, making ultralisks usable) That's how I see it. | ||
|
RoosterSamurai
Japan2108 Posts
| ||
|
Kratisto
United States199 Posts
Also, I count 12 "usable" units for Zerg (11 if we're realistic and eschew the Ultra). If the Observer and the Warp Prism are "usable", then the Overseer and Overlord, which provide similar functionality, are certainly so; and while we're making fun of the Ultra, we should also note that the Carrier, Mothership, and Archon are all completely laughable units, which would pull Protoss down to only 11 usable units. Gee, look at that, one of your premises makes no sense. This is a long, subjective QQ based on some seriously dubious grounds. | ||
|
Turbo.Tactics
Germany675 Posts
ur not analysing it good enough lurkers would only rape mnm on a ramp or by protection would lose hard against them on a flank or vs mech would absolutely demolish anything under swarm lurkers had so many strengths and weaknesses its ridiculous how complex that unit was the baneling can hunt, run. does well on ramp or outside ramp. flank doesnt matter split is impossible (yes it is impossible now move on with ur life plz). it totally rapes bio and its still alot stronger vs hellions than most think. i laff every time a commentator says a guy should make hellion vs banes my point is the lurker was very difficult to use the baneling is very very simple to use and it does everything the lurker does, only better but i guess they needed to make banelings this ridiculous since defiler is gone and muta stack wont give u mapcontrol for shit in the midgame vs t Do you think it is strong or TOO strong? Because I feel alarmed when players use the word "ridiculous". To add something to the Lurker comparison: I am playing out of MorroWs competition but my experiences with the Baneling are even more "lurker-ish". When playing against a Terran Friend of mine I play burrowed Banelings and pretty much contain the Terran exactly the same way a lurker would. At least the Terran has to start scanning...which is always a good thing. It works very well with nydus and is even little Banelingdrops can be SO annoying to Terran and Protoss players (only that i normally won't get the Banelingnest vs Toss because they do shit against any other unit besides zealots and i still rape those with my nerfed roach) However, if more terran players played Mech as safe as MorroW did against HayprO on Metalpolis the other day..... Banelings will see pretty much no light (no light units nor daylight) in the game. | ||
|
okrane
France265 Posts
| ||
|
Lollersauce
United States357 Posts
| ||
| ||
