|
On July 14 2010 22:13 MorroW wrote:
yep lalush, sc2 is all about bruteforce. in sc2 u had a few solutions to stopping somethign "ok i got swarm, okay i got the ramp, ok i have some siege tanks and some mines, ok 2 lurekrs on a ramp, awesome, alright so ill emp this and he backs off". and in sc "ok i gotta rape this with a larger army". sad but true
I feel like this is just because the game is so new. IIRC SC1/BW were like this in their infancy. Players are still working out timings and tactics on kinda-sorta-maybe-halfway-decent maps and units are changing almost weekly.
Give the game a year (maybe even less) and let peoples mechanics improve a little bit more - even you have to admit, MorroW, that trying to have two or three mini-battles at once feels a lot more awkward then the almost inevitable blob vs blob battles that are common on the ladder today.
I just don't feel the metagame has matured enough for most things to be called imbalanced yet. Though I do agree with LaLush that ZvT generally is less forgiving then TvZ - and I play T.
|
A Protoss put to 33 seconds!? how did that get in there!? They must have meant 66 and were using the num pad and miss typed. We all know blizzard is trying make protoss useless. :-)
|
On July 14 2010 23:13 STS17 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2010 22:13 MorroW wrote:
yep lalush, sc2 is all about bruteforce. in sc2 u had a few solutions to stopping somethign "ok i got swarm, okay i got the ramp, ok i have some siege tanks and some mines, ok 2 lurekrs on a ramp, awesome, alright so ill emp this and he backs off". and in sc "ok i gotta rape this with a larger army". sad but true I feel like this is just because the game is so new. IIRC SC1/BW were like this in their infancy. Players are still working out timings and tactics on kinda-sorta-maybe-halfway-decent maps and units are changing almost weekly. Give the game a year (maybe even less) and let peoples mechanics improve a little bit more - even you have to admit, MorroW, that trying to have two or three mini-battles at once feels a lot more awkward then the almost inevitable blob vs blob battles that are common on the ladder today. I just don't feel the metagame has matured enough for most things to be called imbalanced yet. Though I do agree with LaLush that ZvT generally is less forgiving then TvZ - and I play T.
I do think this is true, but at the same time what options are available to zerg? For T and P it's pretty clear where the micro can come in and be improved (FF, Templars, Drops, Warp-ins, Ravens, etc.) but not so with zerg.
So what tactical tools does zerg have?
Infestors
Banelings
Drops
Nydus Worms
Queen (transfusion)
Burrow Move
Mobile units (lings and mutas)
There's an important trend with all of these things though.
None of them are particularly cost effective, especially universally, and they all require a good sized investment.
A lot of the tactical units of other races are sure to be cost effective if managed well. It's very difficult for a Templar to get off a well placed storm and NOT have it cause massive damage, it's really tough for a siege tank positioned well to NOT kill its worth in units. But there's no guarantee on the Zerg side. FG only really does meaningful damage to small clumped units, NP is only really relevant in head on battles, Banelings are only cost effective vs light units, Nydus worms are just flanking tools especially if your opponent is on the ball about killing in base worms. Doom drops are a hefty investment (300/300 now), sure long term it's super cost effective but short term not so much, and it's still not garunteed to be cost effective. Burrow move is the same boat, at times it's great, but there's no real backing to it, all you're doing is assuring you have good positioning with your roaches.
This could be ok as a racial flavor, but it seems a little too extreme right now. There's really no tactical zerg thing you can lean on like you can with the other races, it's all shaky and inconsistent.
|
i can see baneling drops mixed in with roach/hydra to be very deadly in the future.. Like say you attack, you float over like 6 ovies over top of their army, and banelings in only two of them.. They have to guess which ovie has the banelings in it and try to kill that first, or pop goes their entire army... all while having Hydras and Roachs spitting in your face. That is going to be a pain. If they are backed in a corner such as Steppes of war first natural, what can you do vs that other than die?
Zerg also will become dependant on attacking at multiple places at once, with drops, nydus worm, mutas, etc. SC1 all you had was drops, but way more options in SC2 and with roach/hydra actually being a formidable army in big battles that dont die all in 1 second like they did in BW, it gives time to do those things.
I just worry as the game goes on and people start doing these more complex things.. Terran is going to gain even more of an edge from them while the other races will fall behind.
|
Anyone else sitting on X number of bonus pool that refuses to get spent?
|
On July 15 2010 01:07 Bibdy wrote:
Anyone else sitting on X number of bonus pool that refuses to get spent?
same here : <
|
On July 15 2010 01:07 Bibdy wrote:
Anyone else sitting on X number of bonus pool that refuses to get spent?
Yea I have the same issue. I wonder if this is a patch 20 (or whatever the most recent patch is) issue, or if it has been there since the start of phase 2.
|
On July 15 2010 02:08 Chriamon wrote:Show nested quote +On July 15 2010 01:07 Bibdy wrote:
Anyone else sitting on X number of bonus pool that refuses to get spent? Yea I have the same issue. I wonder if this is a patch 20 (or whatever the most recent patch is) issue, or if it has been there since the start of phase 2.
it's only happening since the last patch
|
On July 15 2010 00:11 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2010 23:13 STS17 wrote:On July 14 2010 22:13 MorroW wrote:
yep lalush, sc2 is all about bruteforce. in sc2 u had a few solutions to stopping somethign "ok i got swarm, okay i got the ramp, ok i have some siege tanks and some mines, ok 2 lurekrs on a ramp, awesome, alright so ill emp this and he backs off". and in sc "ok i gotta rape this with a larger army". sad but true I feel like this is just because the game is so new. IIRC SC1/BW were like this in their infancy. Players are still working out timings and tactics on kinda-sorta-maybe-halfway-decent maps and units are changing almost weekly. Give the game a year (maybe even less) and let peoples mechanics improve a little bit more - even you have to admit, MorroW, that trying to have two or three mini-battles at once feels a lot more awkward then the almost inevitable blob vs blob battles that are common on the ladder today. I just don't feel the metagame has matured enough for most things to be called imbalanced yet. Though I do agree with LaLush that ZvT generally is less forgiving then TvZ - and I play T. I do think this is true, but at the same time what options are available to zerg? For T and P it's pretty clear where the micro can come in and be improved (FF, Templars, Drops, Warp-ins, Ravens, etc.) but not so with zerg. So what tactical tools does zerg have? Infestors Banelings Drops Nydus Worms Queen (transfusion) Burrow Move Mobile units (lings and mutas) There's an important trend with all of these things though. None of them are particularly cost effective, especially universally, and they all require a good sized investment. A lot of the tactical units of other races are sure to be cost effective if managed well. It's very difficult for a Templar to get off a well placed storm and NOT have it cause massive damage, it's really tough for a siege tank positioned well to NOT kill its worth in units. But there's no guarantee on the Zerg side. FG only really does meaningful damage to small clumped units, NP is only really relevant in head on battles, Banelings are only cost effective vs light units, Nydus worms are just flanking tools especially if your opponent is on the ball about killing in base worms. Doom drops are a hefty investment (300/300 now), sure long term it's super cost effective but short term not so much, and it's still not garunteed to be cost effective. Burrow move is the same boat, at times it's great, but there's no real backing to it, all you're doing is assuring you have good positioning with your roaches. This could be ok as a racial flavor, but it seems a little too extreme right now. There's really no tactical zerg thing you can lean on like you can with the other races, it's all shaky and inconsistent.
Zerg is the swarm race. At no point in time should you have a force that is cost efficient to levels anywhere near that of the other races. You need more resources because you need to be able to rebuild your next wave after sacrificing the first. Your equal food/resources army must always be inferior to the other races (terran more so then protoss) because you can "snap back" so much more quickly. Such is the nature of your race. Does it need a little tweaking? Probably. But improving your cost efficiency isn't the way to do it.
RE Drops and Burrow Moves: These are tactics, which have an opportunity cost, they can be stopped/negated or they can be extremely effective. It's rare that a properly executed doom drop isn't effective however, while burrow movement is more easily handled. The same can be said for many tactics, like siege drops or cloaked harass of any kind.
|
mutas are not cost effective?
infestors are not cost effective?
banelings are not cost effective?
they're not cost effective if you A-move them into tanks/thors. but it's not like any unit in the game is especially cost effective compared to the ling/marine/zealot, and they are meant to be pawns.
|
A unit's only cost effective if you can obliterate stuff without getting hit...
You know, Void Rays when there aren't any Marines or Vikings around...Siege Tanks or Collossi against a blob of ground units...
Nothing in the Zerg army is MEANT to be cost-effective. You're meant to ram as much shit down the guy's throat as you can reasonably fit in a choke point.
When your gigantic blob of Hydras and Roaches gets up in the guy's face, or you build a magnificent concave of death, THEN they're cost-effective.
|
On July 15 2010 02:31 tarsier wrote:
mutas are not cost effective?
infestors are not cost effective?
banelings are not cost effective?
they're not cost effective if you A-move them into tanks/thors. but it's not like any unit in the game is especially cost effective compared to the ling/marine/zealot, and they are meant to be pawns.
Well, tanks are extremely cost effective, as are hellions. The only part of mech that isnt all that cost effective are thors, and they arent necessary to mech.
|
When did this discussion turn into another tvz balance talk
|
Saying Zerg isn't mean to have strong a cost effective unit is just stupid. The lurker is a key unit for zerg in BW percisely because it could be cost-effective at times.
The point isn't that Zerg needs all these uber cost effective units, clearly they don't. The point is that Zerg lacks any ability to flex a tactic that can use cost effectiveness to open up zerg comebacks and zerg strategies. And no, such a unit does not need to be as strong as the Terran and Protoss counter parts, it just merely needs to exist.
Infestor and Banelings are meant to be that unit but the problem is both cover some of the same role (killing off many light units) and can be rendered relatively ineffective by enemy unit compositions. Meanwhile a siege tank or templar is almost always a good investment.
From my perspective the two classes of units are best explained with a difference in psychology.
For a templar or siege tank the question is often, "I can grab more of this unit, but can I instead trim it back to do something better" while the choice to grab more infestors is more, "Will the infestor be able to do anything for me if I make it?"
You see this in high level games. Players who have the capacity (as in they went mech or got templars) to make something like Templars or Siege tanks will rarely skip an opportunity unless they feel that there's something else that takes more precedence. With the infestors though the situation is more of, "Will this unit get any use if I make it?" Players with the capacity to make infestors may still have an army completely without infestors due to not being useful. It's almost more of a difference between having an army composition and sprinkling a unit into a composition to strengthen it.
Now I love Infestors/Banelings and love their roles, but what I'm trying to point out is just how Zerg has this gap. It's tough to explain, but really if you play zerg enough you should completely pick up on it as it feels very distinct in game. Maybe the way to put it is this type of tactical unit that forces your opponent to react and play differently, but is then still good even when they do or just simplify and put it as Zerg lacks a comeback unit, I don't know.
|
Saying Zerg isn't mean to have strong a cost effective unit is just stupid. The lurker is a key unit for zerg in BW percisely because it could be cost-effective at times.
The point isn't that Zerg needs all these uber cost effective units, clearly they don't. The point is that Zerg lacks any ability to flex a tactic that can use cost effectiveness to open up zerg comebacks and zerg strategies. And no, such a unit does not need to be as strong as the Terran and Protoss counter parts, it just merely needs to exist.
Infestor and Banelings are meant to be that unit but the problem is both cover some of the same role (killing off many light units) and can be rendered relatively ineffective by enemy unit compositions. Meanwhile a siege tank or templar is almost always a good investment.
From my perspective the two classes of units are best explained with a difference in psychology.
For a templar or siege tank the question is often, "I can grab more of this unit, but can I instead trim it back to do something better" while the choice to grab more infestors is more, "Will the infestor be able to do anything for me if I make it?"
You see this in high level games. Players who have the capacity (as in they went mech or got templars) to make something like Templars or Siege tanks will rarely skip an opportunity unless they feel that there's something else that takes more precedence. With the infestors though the situation is more of, "Will this unit get any use if I make it?" Players with the capacity to make infestors may still have an army completely without infestors due to not being useful. It's almost more of a difference between having an army composition and sprinkling a unit into a composition to strengthen it.
Now I love Infestors/Banelings and love their roles, but what I'm trying to point out is just how Zerg has this gap. It's tough to explain, but really if you play zerg enough you should completely pick up on it as it feels very distinct in game. Maybe the way to put it is this type of tactical unit that forces your opponent to react and play differently, but is then still good even when they do or just simplify and put it as Zerg lacks a comeback unit, I don't know.
This right here is exactly what I think. However, i am not too concerned about this issue. It is likely that Blizzard is very much aware of this issue and that they will "complete" the Zerg race when the second chapter of SC2 rolls around.
I am curious however as to what they could add to the other races (especially Terran) as they have so many combat units already and got all bases pretty much covered.
|
Am I the only one who still can't play? This is becoming ridiculous :@
|
On July 14 2010 06:28 MadJack wrote:![[image loading]](http://i31.tinypic.com/2r41xxh.jpg) downloaded patch, bnet doesnt recognize verson  not gonna redownload 1gb in patches again
Did anyone manage to fix this?
|
On July 15 2010 00:15 Skyze wrote:
i can see baneling drops mixed in with roach/hydra to be very deadly in the future.. Like say you attack, you float over like 6 ovies over top of their army, and banelings in only two of them.. They have to guess which ovie has the banelings in it and try to kill that first, or pop goes their entire army... all while having Hydras and Roachs spitting in your face. That is going to be a pain. If they are backed in a corner such as Steppes of war first natural, what can you do vs that other than die?
Zerg also will become dependant on attacking at multiple places at once, with drops, nydus worm, mutas, etc. SC1 all you had was drops, but way more options in SC2 and with roach/hydra actually being a formidable army in big battles that dont die all in 1 second like they did in BW, it gives time to do those things.
I just worry as the game goes on and people start doing these more complex things.. Terran is going to gain even more of an edge from them while the other races will fall behind.
Day9 recently showed a ZvT matchup where Artosis used baneling/zergling drops in coordination with a Roach ground force maneuvered using burrow. During the matchup you see 2 drops, one that goes well and one that goes awful. The difference is getting the banelings to hit the marines instead of the marauders. Now, I think this should absolutely make a difference because it is rewarding good mechanics used in conjunction with good strategy. What I do not like is in both situations, the Terran simply has to stim and a move his forces. It is just so blindingly simple to play Terran. Unlike the other races, all you have to do is focus on macro and will win. The only exception I've seen to this is TLO with his ling/investor/ultra play, but the man just does not make mistakes when it comes to micro and it shouldn't be that difficult to match up against a Terran.
|
I can't play any games after the new patch, i can log on fine, but when I search for matches (1v1), it just keeps searching for minutes and eventually i have to quit or log off sc2.
Is anyone experiencing the same problem? I thought it was my internet connection, but I run other applications smoothly and simultaneously. It seems like I am getting dropped everytime. and after I log off and come back onto sc2, I checked my profile and match history, it says I have tied matches. (all those times that I searched and waited, and gave up, it counted as Tied Matches). Its weird to me.
P.S., I have a mac.
Please Help!
|
If the Zerg gets to Ultras its over for Terran... that's all I know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
