| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Bob300
United States505 Posts
On July 17 2010 09:18 Rea wrote: whats the point of such a list aslong you get 5-30 times more ELO for a win then a loss? Ya this is not true, because when i win i get like 5-9 points when I lose I lose 10 - 22 points. | ||
|
CharlieMurphy
United States22895 Posts
On July 19 2010 09:44 Looky wrote: all these zerg players that are complaining how zerg is weak... DONT PLAY IT THEN! haha i believe they are strong, people like idra, cool, sen have shown us the strength of zerg. did you notice that out of the top 100 players, the only zergs are well known good/decent players and a lot of the T and P are straight no namers? | ||
|
FatkiddsLag
United States413 Posts
| ||
|
ixi.genocide
United States981 Posts
36/100 Terran 33/100 Toss 18/100 Zerg 11/100 Random If this doesn't show something about zergz playability (using these stats) than one might as well not even try. Asians are notorious for switching to whatever is the most powerful and This clearly shows that zerg is lacking in that dept. it should be 29/30/30 assuming that random doesn't change, this means that zerg is 62% below equivalency and 83% below Toss >.> | ||
|
FatkiddsLag
United States413 Posts
| ||
|
Psychopomp
United States237 Posts
| ||
|
Drowsy
United States4876 Posts
On July 19 2010 08:07 Crisium wrote: Indeed, and even then it takes years. Look at Broodwar. 3 Zerg wins in the first 20 OSLs (2 of them by  July). There have been 7 Zerg wins in the 10 OSLs since then. The MSL has the same story - 0 Zerg wins in the first 8 tournaments, followed by 9 Zerg wins in the most recent 15.It's too early to cry for Zerg or whatever. Broodwar was last patched in 2001 but that didn't stop Zerg from being unable to win tournaments for years before becoming the most winnable race that they are now. But the map pool shifted frequently and in the direction of macro-based play and was largely in control of the users rather than blizzard. But on that note, perhaps re-evaluating the map pool would be the best way to try and get things more balanced. I wish blizzard was doing more detailed statistics tracking. I'd be curious to see winrates on scrap station, metalopolis, and desert oasis vs kulas or lt. On the other hand, zergs would also sometimes lose independently of the map. 200/200 of ultra/hydra/ling/infestor can't beat 200/200 collosi/gateway units with even upgrades, and the maps will never change this.. On July 19 2010 10:11 ixi.genocide wrote: Asia server is 36/100 Terran 33/100 Toss 18/100 Zerg 11/100 Random If this doesn't show something about zergz playability (using these stats) than one might as well not even try. Asians are notorious for switching to whatever is the most powerful and This clearly shows that zerg is lacking in that dept. it should be 29/30/30 assuming that random doesn't change, this means that zerg is 62% below equivalency and 83% below Toss >.> BUT I HEARD ZERGS WERE DOMINATING ASIA LIKE 2 MONTHS AGO THEREFORE THERE'S NO PROBLEM!!11 | ||
|
MrGreyness
Australia35 Posts
But that is the concept of the Protoss race. Their units are strong but take time to replace. Zerg on the other hand can macro up a 200/200 army really quickly at really late game. So matching 200/200 armies and saying one loses isn't really a fair analysis of the races. | ||
|
AeonStrife
United States918 Posts
On July 19 2010 10:32 Psychopomp wrote: I like how Terran is 50% of the top 10 in every region. Yeah. Strange right...? However, according to this list it shows that the #1 player is a Zerg player...Does anyone have any info on who this guy is. Sorry, I am too lazy to look through the thread if it has been talked about already... | ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On July 18 2010 02:04 kawazu wrote: Terran macro requires you to constantly be building units and it requires a little forethought as to what you will need to build. OC abilities are very useful but you really need to control when you use them. Totally correct. Terran IS powerful, but that does NOT mean it is easy. Sure there are some builds which seem easy (Marauder / Marine spam), but they usually only win if you win fast; most other terran army compositions REQUIRE multiple production building types and if you can screw up the composition of the army by eliminating one the whole army suffers A LOT. Examples: - Tanks need an aircraft spotter to be able to fire at maximum range - Thors need Marine / Marauder support against swarms of small stuff - Marines / Marauders need Medivacs (compared to a Medic which can be built from Barracks too!) to be able to use Stim Pack regularly So lets stop with the myth that terran is easy to play. On July 18 2010 02:04 kawazu wrote: Zerg probably has the most intensive macro mechanics. You are forced to constantly use the queens spawn larva, which is aggravating. More importantly, your unit production interferes with your drone production which makes Zerg play more complicated. Right again. Zerg have the fastest macro mechanic due to the fact that they have the cheapest main building (which also doubles as their unit production building, so that is ok). The big problem for Zerg is managing the shift from economy to aggression and once the players learn to do this the Zerg will be very very powerful due to superior economy (usually) and the greatest flexibility. | ||
|
Nihilnovi
Sweden696 Posts
Like, you can scew the numbers any way you want: Top 10 is 6 terran 2 toss 2 zerg. "Zomg 60% of top players are terran". | ||
|
FatkiddsLag
United States413 Posts
| ||
|
CruelZeratul
Germany4588 Posts
On July 19 2010 12:44 Carrierhasarrived wrote: @Drowsy But that is the concept of the Protoss race. Their units are strong but take time to replace. Zerg on the other hand can macro up a 200/200 army really quickly at really late game. So matching 200/200 armies and saying one loses isn't really a fair analysis of the races. With 10+ Warpgates even Toss is back at 200/200 very fast. But even though I don't think it's a problem if one race has the most powerfull 200/200 army blob (a Terran Mech ball in SC:BW is also stronger than a Protoss army). If Zerg can't beat Protoss in a straight up fight Zerg has to find another way to win (doing more herass, etc.). | ||
|
Salteador Neo
Andorra5591 Posts
| ||
|
humanimal
United States151 Posts
if i can give my 2 cents, i have a feeling that when sc2 is released to the general public, the trend will naturally augment itself towards that of sc1. Lots of people will be playing with prior sc1 experience and 1 base play will likely dwindle down and Protoss will revert to the adaptive race. Zerg will also likely rise up once people begin to figure out timings and such. Their macro mechanic is so versatile in a sense and while they can be fragile at times, played properly have the potential to roll over strong armies. I think the majority of the issue is centered around the aggressive 1 base play that's so common right now. Zergs need good eco to fund they're armies, but with all the aggression, they just don't have the time and safety to power up. maybe i'm totally wrong, but i just feel like with a lot of sc1 gamers transferring over, sc2 will follow a similar but highly accelerated path in development to the original (micro → macro → timing → harass) EDIT: replying to some other comments On July 19 2010 07:18 sjschmidt93 wrote: I don't know how having one hotkey to build all your units is the least straight forward. Sure, creep and queens but the easy as hell unit producing makes up for that. but the issue is that you have to decide whether to make drones or attacking units. power drones too long and you can't scrap together an army to fight. overcommit to attacking units and you're behind on eco. with the building style of zerg, everything lies in a fine balance where even the smallest mistake can end the game - that's why zerg over here isn't doing so hot. i'm not saying they're underpowered, but playing zerg properly takes good game sense and a lot of quick decision making. the fact that have one hotkey to build all their units makes it difficult because they have to CHOOSE what to build. With protoss and terran, you can make units while you make workers and almost never feel one affect the other. with zerg, the two paths are tied together. | ||
|
nihlon
Sweden5581 Posts
On July 20 2010 05:55 CruelZeratul wrote: With 10+ Warpgates even Toss is back at 200/200 very fast. But even though I don't think it's a problem if one race has the most powerfull 200/200 army blob (a Terran Mech ball in SC:BW is also stronger than a Protoss army). If Zerg can't beat Protoss in a straight up fight Zerg has to find another way to win (doing more herass, etc.). I don't understand people that say this. Are you seriously suggesting that players aren't trying to win and find new ways to win if they constantly are losing to a certain strategy? Terrans like to say this when zerg are complaining about mech like we are stupid or something. I can understand if people are arguing that we haven't had enough time to work out a viable solution, but the notion that people haven't been trying hard is complete bullshit. | ||
|
Vimsey
United Kingdom2235 Posts
I do think something needs to change for the ZvT matchup though. | ||
|
CruelZeratul
Germany4588 Posts
On July 20 2010 07:22 nihlon wrote: I don't understand people that say this. Are you seriously suggesting that players aren't trying to win and find new ways to win if they constantly are losing to a certain strategy? Terrans like to say this when zerg are complaining about mech like we are stupid or something. I can understand if people are arguing that we haven't had enough time to work out a viable solution, but the notion that people haven't been trying hard is complete bullshit. People have tried, thats why we don't see many people complaining about ZvP being absolutely Protoss favoured, even though Protoss potentionally has the stronger amry when maxed. | ||
|
Patches
United States43 Posts
| ||
|
IdrA
United States11541 Posts
On July 19 2010 13:59 Rabiator wrote: Totally correct. Terran IS powerful, but that does NOT mean it is easy. Sure there are some builds which seem easy (Marauder / Marine spam), but they usually only win if you win fast; most other terran army compositions REQUIRE multiple production building types and if you can screw up the composition of the army by eliminating one the whole army suffers A LOT. Examples: - Tanks need an aircraft spotter to be able to fire at maximum range - Thors need Marine / Marauder support against swarms of small stuff - Marines / Marauders need Medivacs (compared to a Medic which can be built from Barracks too!) to be able to use Stim Pack regularly So lets stop with the myth that terran is easy to play. terran isnt particularly easy, in some ways it is actually the hardest to play well, but it is so ridiculously overpowered that you dont even have to play it well for the strength to show through. plus the quick kill builds are quite strong in their own right. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War League of Legends Heroes of the Storm Other Games Grubby15171 summit1g9349 gofns8504 tarik_tv6177 FrodaN1462 ToD189 monkeys_forever188 ArmadaUGS124 Trikslyr21 |
|
Patches Events
GSL
Cure vs herO
SHIN vs Maru
IPSL
Bonyth vs Napoleon
G5 vs JDConan
BSL
OyAji vs JDConan
DragOn vs TBD
Replay Cast
Monday Night Weeklies
Replay Cast
The PondCast
Kung Fu Cup
GSL
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
