Okay so I can't count how many QQ threads I've seen on Zerg being underpowered how it's uncreative it needs changes blah blah blah. Well I play zerg and I'm constantly around some of the best zergs around and generally I tend to disagree and I'm about to explain why.
Tech Switches
Unlike other races where you need to build a whole new production facility to make a new set of units such as a factory a stargate, the zerg only needs to wait on a single tech building and then every single hatch/lair/hive can produce that unit. This makes Zerg the undeniable king of Tech Switching, yes the tech buildings can take quite a while to build but this is to balance out the fact that as soon as it's done there can be 20+ of that unit hatching at any given time.
This kind of rapid unit composition switching is unparalleled by the other races especially terran who has to deal with addons and switching them around if they want to change their unit composition even while dealing with the same units.
Mobility
The zerg air army can be very frightening when used correctly, creep giving movement boosts when exploited allows for aggressive creep expansion letting the zerg dominate the map early on in the game. Later in the game Nydus networks allow a zerg to move their army from one corner of the map to the other in the blink of an eye. Fungal Growth used effectively can stop the mobility of their opponents completely. Zerg is capable of out maneuvering every other race in the game with the exeption of the use of mass recall by protoss but that has limited uses when compared to a good nydus network setup.
Unit Production
Zerg has the capability to reproduce units faster than any other race with the queen mechanics, larva spit is so completely powerful and watching the top zergs at the moment you will see that even they don't miss larva injections. The zerg macro mechanic is tough to deal with as you have to manage every hatchery seperately requiring a lot more multitasking than warpins or dealing with add-ons. But when done effectively the rate at which a zerg can produce units is rather scary.
Conclusion
Zerg has many mechanics that still have not been used to their fullest:
Larva Injection (yes pros still mess this up)
Transfusion strategies
Contamination
Nydus Networks both offensively and defensively
So until this game is released and players get the time to REALLY get their hands on zerg and play with it and experiment then I don't think it's right to really be commenting on how zerg is broken it doesn't work yada yada. Previously people complained that Ultras werent usable and that they were the reason why zerg didn't have any units and now Ultras are being used in top level play somewhat. There might be a few more adjustments to zerg units down the road but for now saying "Zerg sucks fix it now" is a bit of an exaggeration.
No but to be honest, I agree with everything in this post. I've never thought that Zerg was boring, but I suppose everybody is entitled to their own opinions.
Edit: I think that what makes Zerg most interesting for me is the ease of getting new expansions and the additional layer of complexity of balancing workers and military units. Maybe if you don't find that interesting, you might not enjoy Zerg so much.
Zerg is fine as a race, they're just unpolished. Their casters are just not finished, spells are added and removed constantly, and they get swapped a bunch. Roaches aren't finished and need some additional tweaks. Corruptors also seems to fall into that unfinished range.
Compare that to Terran where Blizzard has done such an amazing job. I don't think T is overpowered, I think T is the model. Terran is where the races should be when things are "balanced." Every unit is viable (worst is the Reaper), and almost any tech tree has valid strategies around it.
People mistakenly say "lack of diversity" for Zerg. That's not it. They don't necessarily need any more units, they just need the units they all have to be indispensable in some context. Once all the units have a clear and well-defined niche and an appropriate synergy amongst themselves, the race will feel like T and P.
This won't make them any stronger or weaker. It will just make them have more polish. They're the race that's changed the most probably in the beta and still don't feel settled.
Ultra's have fared much better than Archons, even Day9 said Archon's had turned a corner in his mind. Totally agree with the assessment that zerg has advantages people still need to learn.
Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes. I play zerg because I can see that it has the potential to be totally awesome. As much as I (and even the good people) aren't quite capable of using all the badassery that zerg has available, it's definitely there. And once we start getting good enough to do things, it will be totally awesome.
On July 22 2010 07:19 Brad wrote: Burrow is really underused. I think burrow needs to be used a lot more overall, especially versus Colossus/Siege Tanks.
I don't like how bad they are off creep, that's my biggest complaint. I feel almost encouraged not to leave creep unless I can absolutely win with an a-move
How would you respond if I said, zerg creativity and strength demand so much more focus and apm then the other two races, which is why zerg would appear weaker.
Also "tech switching" isn't a major strength in the late game imo. Protoss have warpgates to handle whatever you are trying to switch to, and terran have more than adequate ways to counter any threat from bio-mech. Plus, anyone who knows how to scout easily negates "tech switches"
Mobility? How much more mobile can you get then warp in tech? Also a bio ball can be quite mobile as well especially with a medic + transport combo.
Sure, zerg can produce more units at the same time if you have the apm to sustain constant larvae inject, but I would hope so as our units are much weaker than protoss'. Think about mass killing units like colossus and HT. They cant wipe out an army incredibly quickly. Also, terran bio can have a new ball up incredibly quickly as well...
I agree that Terran is the finished race. Protoss is also quite far (although the carrier and mothership don't seem perfect). Zerg just had too many things happening in the last phase of the beta..indicating that it's just not finished.. I sincerely hope that Blizzard doesn't wait until the first expansion before adressing these issues... that would be a bit lame..
it'll be interesting to see zerg play on the larger, custom maps that will (probably) eventually be used on the ladder. more space for mobility is good, but that also means more area to cover with creep. i think it will take some serious apm to manage all the creep tumors
Usually play terran as it was my BW race and i love them so much.
Played a few games of Zerg in the end of beta and it does not feel more boring than Terran , i mean they have The Infestor , one of the best casters in game and funniest to play and the core units are so strong , and if you want micro , just try to use banelings as mines , use burrowed roaches (dunno why I havent faced a single person that uses this yet...) Ovie Doom Drops... Nydus Worms.... the list is soooo long.
Of course if you see zerg as "that ling-hydra-roach ball and then 1a" yes of course its boring as hell.
PD: hell even mass queen!! tried it once on a friend and its hilarious to try to make it in ZvZ when it works you just smile so wide!!
On July 22 2010 07:18 Merikh wrote: I completely agree , zerg has yet to be used at its full potential. Shout out to IdrA he has the best unit control as a zerg player! (I said it)
I watched some old IdrA replays and he has improved a ton over the beta. (though that's the way it should be)
On July 22 2010 07:22 floor exercise wrote: I don't like how bad they are off creep, that's my biggest complaint. I feel almost encouraged not to leave creep unless I can absolutely win with an a-move
Well that's a big part of zerg play. People see the speed increase on creep and start thinking that creep is just a really nice thing to have when it's really a necessity. Creep is meant to be an integral part of zerg which is why there's methods of spreading it quickly. It is kinda of annoying in the early game when you straight-up can't have creep though. Probably why I love speedlings so much, they can still do things off creep.
On July 22 2010 07:11 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: There might be a few more adjustments to zerg units down the road but for now saying "Zerg sucks fix it now" is a bit of an exaggeration.
And saying "Zerg is good" isn't an exaggeration? please...
On July 22 2010 07:11 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: There might be a few more adjustments to zerg units down the road but for now saying "Zerg sucks fix it now" is a bit of an exaggeration.
And saying "Zerg is good" isn't an exaggeration? please...
On July 22 2010 07:11 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: There might be a few more adjustments to zerg units down the road but for now saying "Zerg sucks fix it now" is a bit of an exaggeration.
And saying "Zerg is good" isn't an exaggeration? please...
Zerg is good Terran is good Protoss is good
It's all good. I think SC2 is a pretty good game all around right now. Could it be better? Sure! But we'll probably have to wait for the expansions for that to happen.
On July 22 2010 07:22 Dance.jhu wrote: Just for arguments sake:
How would you respond if I said, zerg creativity and strength demand so much more focus and apm then the other two races, which is why zerg would appear weaker.
Also "tech switching" isn't a major strength in the late game imo. Protoss have warpgates to handle whatever you are trying to switch to, and terran have more than adequate ways to counter any threat from bio-mech. Plus, anyone who knows how to scout easily negates "tech switches"
So? Wow it requires focus and APM thats good for a competitive game to have a high skill cap. Sorry but easy to counter that argument.
And you underestimate the power of a solid tech switch, being around some of the best players because of my position in Root Gaming and my role as a caster in iCCup TV a devastating tech switch can really demolish people. Zerg has such a great capability to play mind games by combining their ability to switch compositions with their quick unit production. Go into an engagement trade even or even come out slightly worse and then have a completely DIFFERENT army on them immediately. Players don't know how to react to that and frequently will make mistakes.
Also early game sauron zerg strategies are still possible with roaches even at 2 food just because when larva spit is utilized correctly and you get your creep spread you're able to keep roaches in their face aggressively while expanding... it's disgusting how powerful Zerg can be when a player makes no mistakes.
On July 22 2010 07:11 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: There might be a few more adjustments to zerg units down the road but for now saying "Zerg sucks fix it now" is a bit of an exaggeration.
And saying "Zerg is good" isn't an exaggeration? please...
Notice I didnt say zerg is great, zerg is OP, zerg is the best. I said zerg is good. Zerg can stay in there with the other races and win just like the other two and people need to stop saying Zerg is underpowered, because really it isn't.
Zerg has many mechanics that still have not been used to their fullest:
* Larva Injection (yes pros still mess this up) * Transfusion strategies * Contamination * Nydus Networks both offensively and defensively
I disagree on larva injection not being used to the fullest. and if you are constantly doing your larva injections you cannot do any transfusion strategies unless you get many queens. Contamination imo is good but overrated but i definitely agree with the nydus network point. I don't think zerg is underpowered at all but i do think it is the hardest race to play.
On July 22 2010 07:32 pieisamazing wrote: You're right. Zerg isn't underpowered. What they are is boring.
Then don't play Zerg plenty of people find it fun, others find Protoss warp-ins boring it's called personal taste that shouldn't effect people's thoughts on balance changes. IE Zerg shouldnt be changed just because some people think they're boring when plenty of others find them fun as hell.
iCCup.Raelcun, I think it would be easier if we went into more specific examples. Did you watch Game 2 of IdrA & Tester? What do you think he could of done differently?
I want to play zerg, though. I played all the races in brood war (I wasn't very good) but I found all of them to be fun. I tried the other races after playing zerg and they are more interesting and fun.
Zerg, however, is not. This is to say nothing of balance. They just seem so bland in a way that the other two races are not.
On July 22 2010 07:22 Dance.jhu wrote: Just for arguments sake:
How would you respond if I said, zerg creativity and strength demand so much more focus and apm then the other two races, which is why zerg would appear weaker.
Also "tech switching" isn't a major strength in the late game imo. Protoss have warpgates to handle whatever you are trying to switch to, and terran have more than adequate ways to counter any threat from bio-mech. Plus, anyone who knows how to scout easily negates "tech switches"
So? Wow it requires focus and APM thats good for a competitive game to have a high skill cap. Sorry but easy to counter that argument.
And you underestimate the power of a solid tech switch, being around some of the best players because of my position in Root Gaming and my role as a caster in iCCup TV a devastating tech switch can really demolish people. Zerg has such a great capability to play mind games by combining their ability to switch compositions with their quick unit production. Go into an engagement trade even or even come out slightly worse and then have a completely DIFFERENT army on them immediately. Players don't know how to react to that and frequently will make mistakes.
Also early game sauron zerg strategies are still possible with roaches even at 2 food just because when larva spit is utilized correctly and you get your creep spread you're able to keep roaches in their face aggressively while expanding... it's disgusting how powerful Zerg can be when a player makes no mistakes.
I agree completely, just I was just suggesting that maybe in order for zerg to stay competitive, it demands so much more focus and apm than the other two races. I'm not trying to say that it shouldn't require it. Also, I more talking about the midlevel of diamond rather than the very top players of the ladder. So please consider players that do make mistakes. Also, I added some things to my post, I was hoping i could get your opinion on that as well.
I dont think zerg is underpowered at all, just maybe it demands more.
On July 22 2010 07:35 Moozeo wrote: iCCup.Raelcun, I think it would be easier if we went into more specific examples. Did you watch Game 2 of IdrA & Tester? What do you think he could of done differently?
Make a God Damn Spire, he did it fine against Huk, but against Tester he just kept making Hydras la da da dee da into the lategame where you really need to have a spire just to cover your ass in case your opponent is going to switch to colossus on you. Plus it allows you to quick switch to broodlords off hive tech as well, Idra simply fell into the macro more roach/hydra trap and Tester smashed him because of it.
The zerg air army can be very frightening when used correctly,
I'm sorry but terran and protoss air dominates zerg air.
and Unit Production
Zerg has the capability to reproduce units faster than any other race with the queen mechanics, larva spit is so completely powerful and watching the top zergs at the moment you will see that even they don't miss larva injections. The zerg macro mechanic is tough to deal with as you have to manage every hatchery seperately requiring a lot more multitasking than warpins or dealing with add-ons. But when done effectively the rate at which a zerg can produce units is rather scary.
Protoss can recreate a heavy army VERY FAST, maybe not as fast as a zerg with constant larva injections, but veryyyyy fast with chrono'd warpgates.
I agree with your post Raelcun, but I feel like I should add that, atleast to me, zerg is the race that benefits the most from having a really high active APM. (Active APM meaning you are actually doing something with your 200+ APM, instead of just clicking random things and making boxes with your mouse.) I feel like, as we get further into the game, the zerg race will seem to improve as players APM and control increase.
Else I'd just like to say I think it's about time we see one of these threads cause quite frankly, the 400 different "zerg is so weak" threads were getting pretty annoying. Hopefully this helps open a few eyes that just go into "Zerg-is-so-weak" mode b/c of some whiny pros
Mobility? How much more mobile can you get then warp in tech? Also a bio ball can be quite mobile as well especially with a medic + transport combo.
Sure, zerg can produce more units at the same time if you have the apm to sustain constant larvae inject, but I would hope so as our units are much weaker than protoss'. Think about mass killing units like colossus and HT. They cant wipe out an army incredibly quickly. Also, terran bio can have a new ball up incredibly quickly as well.
Warp-in tech is reliant on pylons, if a zerg can hunt down your pylons with overlords placed in effective places then the mobility from warp-ins are severely limited.
Colossus have their counters and so do HT, terran bio ball can be easily dealt with by zerg and most zergs would rather see a bio ball over a mech ball because a bio ball is easier to deal with. Bio ball gets chain fungal growthed until medivacs are out of energy and they're all low health and then zerg just streams units in to roll them over.
@ Pocketpurple
If a protoss is staying on just warpgate tech and not adding in anything else then they will lose so early game warp ins are almost as good as larva inject but not in the lategame where they have to rely on other units like colossus immortals and possibly stargate units as well. The unique part of the zerg mechanics is they stay true through the entire game.
If a zerg is staying on just warpgate tech and not adding in anything else then they will lose so early game warp ins are almost as good as larva inject but not in the lategame where they have to rely on other units like colossus immortals and possibly stargate units as well. The unique part of the zerg mechanics is they stay true through the entire game.
good point. I agree with this topic that zerg is good. and i think this game is amazingly well balanced considering it isn't even out yet. However, i do find that ZvT is a very hard matchup for zerg, not imba but very hard to win for zerg.
On July 22 2010 07:11 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: Okay so I can't count how many QQ threads I've seen on Zerg being underpowered how it's uncreative it needs changes blah blah blah. Well I play zerg and I'm constantly around some of the best zergs around and generally I tend to disagree and I'm about to explain why.
Tech Switches
Unlike other races where you need to build a whole new production facility to make a new set of units such as a factory a stargate, the zerg only needs to wait on a single tech building and then every single hatch/lair/hive can produce that unit. This makes Zerg the undeniable king of Tech Switching, yes the tech buildings can take quite a while to build but this is to balance out the fact that as soon as it's done there can be 20+ of that unit hatching at any given time.
This kind of rapid unit composition switching is unparalleled by the other races especially terran who has to deal with addons and switching them around if they want to change their unit composition even while dealing with the same units.
Mobility
The zerg air army can be very frightening when used correctly, creep giving movement boosts when exploited allows for aggressive creep expansion letting the zerg dominate the map early on in the game. Later in the game Nydus networks allow a zerg to move their army from one corner of the map to the other in the blink of an eye. Fungal Growth used effectively can stop the mobility of their opponents completely. Zerg is capable of out maneuvering every other race in the game with the exeption of the use of mass recall by protoss but that has limited uses when compared to a good nydus network setup.
Unit Production
Zerg has the capability to reproduce units faster than any other race with the queen mechanics, larva spit is so completely powerful and watching the top zergs at the moment you will see that even they don't miss larva injections. The zerg macro mechanic is tough to deal with as you have to manage every hatchery seperately requiring a lot more multitasking than warpins or dealing with add-ons. But when done effectively the rate at which a zerg can produce units is rather scary.
Conclusion
Zerg has many mechanics that still have not been used to their fullest:
Larva Injection (yes pros still mess this up)
Transfusion strategies
Contamination
Nydus Networks both offensively and defensively
So until this game is released and players get the time to REALLY get their hands on zerg and play with it and experiment then I don't think it's right to really be commenting on how zerg is broken it doesn't work yada yada. Previously people complained that Ultras werent usable and that they were the reason why zerg didn't have any units and now Ultras are being used in top level play somewhat. There might be a few more adjustments to zerg units down the road but for now saying "Zerg sucks fix it now" is a bit of an exaggeration.
1. Tech switches - nothing new really. Yes it's an advantage of the Zerg race, everyone is aware of it. My point is that by stating this, it's not an argument that anyone could have been missing in the entire balance debate thus far.
2. Mobility - Zerg is not very mobile at all, at least compared to it's BW counterpart. Creep tumors have been nerfed at the rate it can expand creep, and unless you are going to forgo multiple spawn larvaes, there is no such thing as the "aggressive early game creep expansion that lets Zerg dominate the early game." Fungal growth can stop an enemy in it's tracks yes, but Terran now has the ability to transport it's entire army into your base via dropship (a tactic I find highly underused) to bypass defenses. Risky, yes, but they nonetheless have the transportation power (think of TvT BW where most of the armies are inside the dropships and you can doom drop... very powerful ability, especially with high DPS stimmed bio armies). Toss can warp to anywhere on the map, and fast stalkers with blink which make up a strong core of any toss army heavily counteract this supposed Zerg mobility. Off creep, the Protoss army is just as fast if not faster than the Zerg army.
3. Unit Production - Protoss can reinforce the battle much faster than the Zerg, it's just Zerg can do more at once. Protoss instantly warps in another 8 units MIDBATTLE which if you barely held off his push, the reinforcements are going to hurt. By the time your units hatch, he'll have 16 units knocking on your doorstep pounding away, while your army is scattered. Yes, it's true overall that Zerg can remax the fastest, but that means a lot less when your units are a lot weaker.
The only valid point I really see (personally) is the potential of nydus networks... which has already been advocated by people plenty of times :-/.
I agree particularly on the point about tech switching. It seems that many zerg players try to "brute force" their way to a win rather than utilizing perhaps the best aspect of the race. I think as our understanding of the game progresses, instead of following linear paths into the late game, we will start seeing multiple tech paths during the mid game switching back and forth.
As a terran player, there's nothing worse than pumping mauraders and tanks to deal with a sizable force of roaches, and then having to frantically train anti-air when 8 mutalisks start killing scvs at your backside only a minute or two later.
I can pretty much agree with you but I have to disagree with the production. I don't think Zerg is the fastest unit production race anymore, with warpgates I feel like Protoss have that slight edge over Zerg. Warpgates produce units crazy fast, and if you Chronoboost them? Holy shit they reinforce so damn quickly it's not even funny.
I think zerg is very strong and I'm going to continue to have that race as my main. I was thinking about why people consider zerg underpowered and why they think zerg lack variety. I think it is because all the advantages stated in the OP seems to take a lot of apm. I mean, creep tumors and larvae inject are incredibly hard to keep track of. The vast majority of players on TL are not at the top level so its hard to utilize it to its full effect. Which translates into a weaker race, and hence the bitching and moaning.
I know that when I'm on top of my game with creep spreading and larvae inject, I can easily out expand my opponent and make him afraid to move out. It makes me smile that I play Zerg.
I was just thinking. Can you rally into a Nydus? If so you could put a worm near the battle and reinforce as instantly as the toss can. Could be pretty neat and just one more example of how zerg just needs to explore more options.
And actually, even if you can't rally into the Nydus, its still fine. Just need to put some effort into it.
Dont you guys worry. One day the BoxeR of Sc2 Zerg will come along and 30% will switch to Zerg and try being awesome with the Race they decided to be underpowered.
On July 22 2010 07:11 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: There might be a few more adjustments to zerg units down the road but for now saying "Zerg sucks fix it now" is a bit of an exaggeration.
And saying "Zerg is good" isn't an exaggeration? please...
Notice I didnt say zerg is great, zerg is OP, zerg is the best. I said zerg is good. Zerg can stay in there with the other races and win just like the other two and people need to stop saying Zerg is underpowered, because really it isn't.
What you say is true for mediocre players, but at the top level the things are pretty clear the latest results can't all be wrong. Statistics don't lie so blatantly, they can be wrong but not with the margins we've seen lately, and god knows we've had a ton of that in the past few days. You can't claim that 90% of the Zerg players play the race in wrong way, that would be just ignorant. You can claim that the metagame hasn't evolved enough or that the maps aren't balanced though.
Also if you claim zerg is good then they wouldn't need the "adjustments" you mentioned in your first post because that would make them great or OP. You try and make this whole point of zerg being fine, then you create a small loop whole for yourself with the last line. You either say they are good and all the races are equal, or you say zerg units need "more adjustments", which automatically debunks your whole all races are equal point.
@Fabled, Did you watch Sheth vs Huk? He had Creep at Huk's door on big maps like Lost Temple and Metalopolis in the early game and used that to do aggressive Hydra attacks. To aggressively spread creep you need more than just creep tumours he was using overlords to help them spread faster by having patches of creep for the creep tumour to target by the time the cooldown was ready.
Also Fungal Growth > Dropships so kind of, warp-ins are powerful but usually early on the zerg has a free reign of the map so if they're aggressively hunting down pylons they can't really. Nydus networks have been brought up in the past but usually by people like Avilo who say that you need to make multiple networks and build 10 worms at the same time. Putting one worm in each base and having an infestor ready to fungal growth to delay the army so that you can get your army out to defend is an extremely potent strategy. Yes some of these points have been brought up before but it doesnt change the fact that even the top zergs havent fully utilized all of the race's mechanics.
On July 22 2010 07:50 Bibbit wrote: I was just thinking. Can you rally into a Nydus? If so you could put a worm near the battle and reinforce as instantly as the toss can. Could be pretty neat and just one more example of how zerg just needs to explore more options.
And actually, even if you can't rally into the Nydus, its still fine. Just need to put some effort into it.
I agree with everything that has been said in this post! Hell, it's about time someone stood up for Zerg. Everyone's been whining about how they're too weak when I've barely seen nydus worms and tech switches being abused as much as they should be. Considering Zerg only has 9 units (8 of which are army units), they really need to be crafty. Unlike Terran, Zerg don't really have many units that completely hard counter the other races' units.
very good post. I've always thought that the ability for zerg to tech switch so quickly and easily was something that we don't see nearly enough.
Zergs should be getting all of their t1 and t2 tech structures in the mid-late game and abuse the fact that they can spawn a direct counter to your army with just a little scouting. A pro zerg on 3-4 bases with every larva unit available to him is probably the scariest thing one could encounter.
Well said realcun. The game is still in its infancy stages. Broodwar never got to the point where it is at until years after its release, we just need to give it time and to learn it.
Unlike other races where you need to build a whole new production facility to make a new set of units such as a factory a stargate, the zerg only needs to wait on a single tech building and then every single hatch/lair/hive can produce that unit. This makes Zerg the undeniable king of Tech Switching, yes the tech buildings can take quite a while to build but this is to balance out the fact that as soon as it's done there can be 20+ of that unit hatching at any given time.
This kind of rapid unit composition switching is unparalleled by the other races especially terran who has to deal with addons and switching them around if they want to change their unit composition even while dealing with the same units.
Zerg is a race that reacts to their opponent depending on what the opponent does. If they weren't able to do this then Zerg would have no viability in this game what so ever. This brings up another point why scouting as a Zerg player is so important.
If Zerg wasn't able to just throw up a Roach Warren when they saw mass Zealots, they would lose. Zerg is a macro heavy race as you should know.
People who say Zerg is overpowered or underpowered wrong. Blizzard has been in production of Starcraft 2 for a stupidly long time. I am pretty sure they balanced out the 3 races pretty evenly.
In many ways I agree. These strategies are there for people to master to get zerg top tier. The problem with saying that is Toss and Terran are in the same category. With time all 3 races will improve dramatically and while improvements might not be as much as Zerg, I do think that zerg needs a buff (I would recommend making a 1 food unit that can your "main" army unit).
The thing about Terran mech is inevitability. Tanks are extremely powerful against ground and Thors counter air with rines and marauders being shields and great damage dealers themselves.
I think that the main strat that is going to balance out mech is having a large amount of zerglings waiting for the surround.
I don't think balance issues are big enough to make a topic, zvp at least doesn't even feel bad. But this sort of topic doesn't prove a point either unless OP is wellknown zerg player. With my scene knowledge I'd only be happy with handful (10-15) zerg names opening this thread and saying zerg was fine I'm not aware what Raelcun is playing, but if not zerg at top level then there's just no sense making these topics. You have to have proof under own pelt to claim one race is completely balanced to have credibility. The same reason I wouldn't feel happy making topic "T imba!1" because I could not discuss all the details with high terran experience.
On July 22 2010 07:11 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: Okay so I can't count how many QQ threads I've seen on Zerg being underpowered how it's uncreative it needs changes blah blah blah. Well I play zerg and I'm constantly around some of the best zergs around and generally I tend to disagree and I'm about to explain why.
Tech Switches
Unlike other races where you need to build a whole new production facility to make a new set of units such as a factory a stargate, the zerg only needs to wait on a single tech building and then every single hatch/lair/hive can produce that unit. This makes Zerg the undeniable king of Tech Switching, yes the tech buildings can take quite a while to build but this is to balance out the fact that as soon as it's done there can be 20+ of that unit hatching at any given time.
This kind of rapid unit composition switching is unparalleled by the other races especially terran who has to deal with addons and switching them around if they want to change their unit composition even while dealing with the same units.
Mobility
The zerg air army can be very frightening when used correctly, creep giving movement boosts when exploited allows for aggressive creep expansion letting the zerg dominate the map early on in the game. Later in the game Nydus networks allow a zerg to move their army from one corner of the map to the other in the blink of an eye. Fungal Growth used effectively can stop the mobility of their opponents completely. Zerg is capable of out maneuvering every other race in the game with the exeption of the use of mass recall by protoss but that has limited uses when compared to a good nydus network setup.
Unit Production
Zerg has the capability to reproduce units faster than any other race with the queen mechanics, larva spit is so completely powerful and watching the top zergs at the moment you will see that even they don't miss larva injections. The zerg macro mechanic is tough to deal with as you have to manage every hatchery seperately requiring a lot more multitasking than warpins or dealing with add-ons. But when done effectively the rate at which a zerg can produce units is rather scary.
Conclusion
Zerg has many mechanics that still have not been used to their fullest:
Larva Injection (yes pros still mess this up)
Transfusion strategies
Contamination
Nydus Networks both offensively and defensively
So until this game is released and players get the time to REALLY get their hands on zerg and play with it and experiment then I don't think it's right to really be commenting on how zerg is broken it doesn't work yada yada. Previously people complained that Ultras werent usable and that they were the reason why zerg didn't have any units and now Ultras are being used in top level play somewhat. There might be a few more adjustments to zerg units down the road but for now saying "Zerg sucks fix it now" is a bit of an exaggeration.
Zerg can produce and reproduce the most units, too bad they get melted in record time.
Read the QQ before QQing.
This isnt BW, the advantages to the things you are mentioning dont apply as much to sc2.
Good post Raelcun. Highlighting the reasons why zerg is great (not moreso than others perhaps) but why you shouldn't blame the race when you can't play.
i agree with everything Raelcun said EXCEPT the part about Zerg's Air, pheonixes are a huge threat if used corrrectly, and well all i gotta say about Terran is "god damn vikings"
The only problem zerg has atm, is the inability to scout properly. Yes you can sacrifice an overlord, but until you get lair up, and get the overlord speed upgrade, you are pretty much fucked, if a toss decides to give you an early push, cos you wont see it coming that easy.
They gotta change overlord upgrade to hatch, and not lair.
And do i really need to mention all the hardcounters to zerg, with their inability to kill anything that flies? =).
There are many merits to the OP! I have played zerg 100% of beta time (mainly because it was my main in BW). However, let's not forget our faithful TL members Artosis and Idra who BOTH selected zerg because they felt it was the most challenging/capable of potential out of the three races. That deserves some thought too
Your list is very short lolol. Sure you explained how the zerg can grow but you missed the step where you compared them to the other races. We haven't seen the terran potential, which as it stands could be unstoppable. You cannot deny that there is more to the other races. All terran units, except hellion and reaper, have spells which makes micro more important instead of 1a'ing to victory. And as for protoss there is also much more left unexplored such as: carriers, motherships, dark templar, warp prism action.
Your conclusion proves my point; zerg doesn't have much room to grow. Idra keeps his queen pretty low with spawn larvae and i can't see a huge difference in say a year when they pros perfect it. As for transfusion and contamination its not like these spells are free and there is just raw potential that is unused. It wouldn't be wise to spend 100 gas just for more contamination and the same goes for the queen. As for nydus we have seen them defensively in bw so we know what they can do and we have seen them offensively a bunch already. Don't make the mistake of appealing to ignorance and saying all your wildest dreams lie ahead because you don't know otherwise.
TL;DR While zerg has some room to grow, it is nothing compared to the potential protoss and terran have.
On July 22 2010 08:20 tollz wrote: i agree with everything Raelcun said EXCEPT the part about Zerg's Air, pheonixes are a huge threat if used corrrectly, and well all i gotta say about Terran is "god damn vikings"
Vikings suck vs muta..
Qzy Denmark. July 22 2010 08:23. Posts 135 The only problem zerg has atm, is the inability to scout proberly. Yes you can sacrifice an overlord, but until you get lair up, and get the overlord speed upgrade, you are pretty much fucked, if a toss decides to give you an early push, cos you wont see it coming that easy.
They gotta change overlord upgrade to hatch, and not lair.
And do i really need to mention all the hardcounters to zerg, with their inability to kill anything that flies? =).
All you have to do is sit an overlord outside the ramp of the main, pretty much every map has a spot where you can have vision of the choke and still be able to save ovie if it gets attacked by early sentry or stalker.
On July 22 2010 08:23 Qzy wrote: The only problem zerg has atm, is the inability to scout properly. Yes you can sacrifice an overlord, but until you get lair up, and get the overlord speed upgrade, you are pretty much fucked, if a toss decides to give you an early push, cos you wont see it coming that easy.
They gotta change overlord upgrade to hatch, and not lair.
And do i really need to mention all the hardcounters to zerg, with their inability to kill anything that flies? =).
I'm sorry, I think the Nydus is a cool structure in SC2, but if I hear player after player who has obviously never used a Nydus talk about the structure in a way that suggests as soon as people figure it out it's going to be way OP. Nydus might end up being really cool on large maps (none exist, but with supply caps being only 200/200 I think those maps might be bad for zerg in other ways), but on the current set of ladder maps Nydus is just too slow. Not that it has no use, but the unload rate is just SOOOOOOO SLOW.... it's riskier to use a nydus than to do a drop and the gas investment makes it a little risky in the mid-game, if it fails you're out 200 (arguably only 100) gas in a relatively early position.
The problem with the nydus is that often you're entering a situation almost blind, you can do some damage with a hit/run, but it's difficult for it to be cost-effective.
On July 22 2010 08:28 DanielD wrote: Vikings suck vs muta..
In an only viking vs muta fight, I totally agree. But in a mech strategy, some vikings (9range I think) in combinaison of a thor can be very strong against muta. You have to protect your vikings to exploit their range.
On July 22 2010 07:22 Dance.jhu wrote: Just for arguments sake:
How would you respond if I said, zerg creativity and strength demand so much more focus and apm then the other two races, which is why zerg would appear weaker.
Also "tech switching" isn't a major strength in the late game imo. Protoss have warpgates to handle whatever you are trying to switch to, and terran have more than adequate ways to counter any threat from bio-mech. Plus, anyone who knows how to scout easily negates "tech switches"
So? Wow it requires focus and APM thats good for a competitive game to have a high skill cap. Sorry but easy to counter that argument.
And you underestimate the power of a solid tech switch, being around some of the best players because of my position in Root Gaming and my role as a caster in iCCup TV a devastating tech switch can really demolish people. Zerg has such a great capability to play mind games by combining their ability to switch compositions with their quick unit production. Go into an engagement trade even or even come out slightly worse and then have a completely DIFFERENT army on them immediately. Players don't know how to react to that and frequently will make mistakes.
Also early game sauron zerg strategies are still possible with roaches even at 2 food just because when larva spit is utilized correctly and you get your creep spread you're able to keep roaches in their face aggressively while expanding... it's disgusting how powerful Zerg can be when a player makes no mistakes.
On July 22 2010 07:11 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: There might be a few more adjustments to zerg units down the road but for now saying "Zerg sucks fix it now" is a bit of an exaggeration.
And saying "Zerg is good" isn't an exaggeration? please...
Notice I didnt say zerg is great, zerg is OP, zerg is the best. I said zerg is good. Zerg can stay in there with the other races and win just like the other two and people need to stop saying Zerg is underpowered, because really it isn't.
I don't think that was his point. He saying something along the lines that with equal skilled players, the zerg has to "work" harder with stupid larva mechanics and such. While a protoss is free to use APM more productively. That's how it would work in theory. Even when I draw zerg as random my average APM is 30 points higher than with protoss or zerg. And I'd hardly call pressing a button every 40 seconds contributing to a skill cap when it's easily circumvented with an out-of-game timer.
All you have to do is sit an overlord outside the ramp of the main, pretty much every map has a spot where you can have vision of the choke and still be able to save ovie if it gets attacked by early sentry or stalker.
On July 22 2010 08:34 MoreFasho wrote: The problem with the nydus is that often you're entering a situation almost blind, you can do some damage with a hit/run, but it's difficult for it to be cost-effective.
Nydus are not just to pop in your opponent base. It's about getting more mobility. Some actual maps are just too one dimensional (steppes of war) to use them to their fully potential. But the map where they are very strong, Desert Oasis, is banned from tourneys etc.
On bigger maps I'm pretty sure we would see a lot of more nydus worms.
So until this game is released and players get the time to REALLY get their hands on zerg and play with it and experiment then I don't think it's right to really be commenting on how zerg is broken it doesn't work yada yada. Previously people complained that Ultras werent usable and that they were the reason why zerg didn't have any units and now Ultras are being used in top level play somewhat. There might be a few more adjustments to zerg units down the road but for now saying "Zerg sucks fix it now" is a bit of an exaggeration.
Ultras didn't become a viable unit (and that is still debatable) until they made heavy modifications to the unit based on this type of input. Zerg was an after thought for this game and we are simply discussing what we feel isn't working with this race in order to facilitate these types of changes. People are getting a little jumpy because they want their race to be playing its best on launch day, I feel it is vital that we continue to have these types of debates to help Blizzard observe what is happening at all levels of play and make the changes they feel necessary.
I definitely agree. I think it's just easier for people to understand the production mechanisms of Terran, and don't quite know how to deal with the zerg mechanisms. Zerg are incredibly flexible, but that means you have to be making the right decisions. I think to a lot of people, it's hard to understand, and so they play zerg like they play the other races, which makes them end up losing.
On July 22 2010 07:54 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: @Fabled, Did you watch Sheth vs Huk? He had Creep at Huk's door on big maps like Lost Temple and Metalopolis in the early game and used that to do aggressive Hydra attacks. To aggressively spread creep you need more than just creep tumours he was using overlords to help them spread faster by having patches of creep for the creep tumour to target by the time the cooldown was ready.
Also Fungal Growth > Dropships so kind of, warp-ins are powerful but usually early on the zerg has a free reign of the map so if they're aggressively hunting down pylons they can't really. Nydus networks have been brought up in the past but usually by people like Avilo who say that you need to make multiple networks and build 10 worms at the same time. Putting one worm in each base and having an infestor ready to fungal growth to delay the army so that you can get your army out to defend is an extremely potent strategy. Yes some of these points have been brought up before but it doesnt change the fact that even the top zergs havent fully utilized all of the race's mechanics.
I watched it, but I don't remember, I'll have to take a look, but I wouldn't personally say lair tech is early game, nor are hydras. Maybe that's where the misunderstanding is.
Personally I feel there is vast amounts of potential in having mass dropships that enable you to drop an entire army in a Zerg main, snipe a hive and some critical tech buildings, and fight the units that are reinforcing into you. Recall that when you do so, you'll have a major positioning advantage when Zerg rushes back to the base, as buildings will be in the way and lings will arrive much faster (and in a line) to your troops, making him have to wait all the way for the other Roaches/Hydras. Merely the threat of a doom drop from Terran is in itself giving the Terran tons of potential (similar to how merely the potential of DT in SC1 forced Terrans to get early turrets). Then you have all your dropships to heal your stimmed units that are taking down the buildings, etc.
Concerning Nyduses, the units come out really slowly, and I doubt with the speed of Terran units that your entire Nydus at multiple bases would be viable, but who knows. We can see with nydus canals in SC1 that usually you don't even have enough army out in time, and the units through the canals come out a million times faster, and you could utilize Dark Swarm and lurkers in small numbers to delay for much more time (fungal... not so much I feel, but I have definitely used it to delay army movement before like you suggest and buy time).
I just have a massive problem with the maxed army Zerg, I've had numerous games where I've sat at 200/200 vs a 2 base toss, with tons of minerals to spare, and lost the game. My most recent game I can recall was a game where I gained a massive early base advantage, had 5 base vs 2 base, 200/200 and 5k minerals and 2k gas in the bank. Stupidly, I didn't get an ultra cavern vs the Toss, but instead stuck with Ling/Roach/Hydra (and outupgrading him). As he moved out to secure his third, I burrowed my roaches and popped out on top of his army, and moved in wiht hydra support, but he demolished them. I had around ~35-40 larvae saved up, and instantly started reinforcing. However, his ball was able to come in and power through all my separated weak reinforcements, and he reinforced his ball with warp gate units before mine even hatched. I got annihilated.
Imo, that's just broken. Even if I could have won with Ultralisks (I'm near positive if i just built an ultra cavern and like 10 ultras I could have cleaved with 5 armor through his mass stalker/sentry/colossus ball). But I shouldn't be forced to use them to have even a remote chance at fighting his army of tier 1.
It's moments like that where I just think Zerg is broken lategame, and it's just as bad if not worse vs Terran.
All you have to do is sit an overlord outside the ramp of the main, pretty much every map has a spot where you can have vision of the choke and still be able to save ovie if it gets attacked by early sentry or stalker.
you obviously don't play zerg.
Yes, cost for cost viking suck vs muta. Obviously viking are good over marines or turrets but that's not what the guy I was responding to said.
And... I have played Z. I don't main Z, but it sure as hell didn't take me a long time to figure out that you can sit an ovie right outside a toss' main ramp/choke (after your inital ovie scout does his run-thru ofc) and watch for early aggression (2 gate, missing buildings, etc etc). Proxy is another story as you can scout that the same as any other race would, with workers.
I'm seeing a lot of Zerg whining around the forums, but watching a lot of YouTube replays, it shows that very few people are actually using Zerg to its full capacity.
For example, Roach can move while burrowed, and yet how many Zerg replays actually utilize that terrific ability of the Roach to ambush enemy lines taking away tanks and Thors and then burrowing again and moving to safety? I've seen that once and it was a replay by Cool, a Korean player if I'm not mistaken. And again if I'm not mistaken, Koreans own with Zerg. Koreans are doing something amazing with Zerg that players from the US and EU need to learn.
As a Terran player, I'm very envious of the Zerg's Nydus Network, the ability to move an entire squad of 200/200 units from one side of the map to the other in a blink of an eye. Again very few Zerg replays showcase that Zerg talent.
Zerg needs a slight upgrade, but not an overhaul. Zerg isn't as underpowered as most people make it to be.
Sorry I don't buy it. I don't care how many top zerg players you're around or how much iccup experience you have.
Every single one of your points is either a double edged sword or a requirement for the race to even be functional, not a reason zerg is good.
On July 22 2010 08:48 thisblindman wrote: For example, Roach can move while burrowed, and yet how many Zerg replays actually utilize that terrific ability of the Roach to ambush enemy lines taking away tanks and Thors and then burrowing again and moving to safety?
Do you even play zerg? Have you made roaches against any decent T mech? You do know what scan is right?
As a Terran player
Oh ok, well forgive me then you seem very qualified to tell us all about how great zerg is.
On July 22 2010 08:23 Qzy wrote: The only problem zerg has atm, is the inability to scout properly. Yes you can sacrifice an overlord, but until you get lair up, and get the overlord speed upgrade, you are pretty much fucked, if a toss decides to give you an early push, cos you wont see it coming that easy.
They gotta change overlord upgrade to hatch, and not lair.
And do i really need to mention all the hardcounters to zerg, with their inability to kill anything that flies? =).
drone scout?
queens and hydras to kill early air?
Again, if you don't see a hidden tech going on, you'll only have 1 queen per hatch.
Drone scout into a closed off base? I don't get that one. If you mean the initial drone, it gets sniped off when the first stalker pops in, and then you are in the dark.
I wouldn't call hydra for "early" as it's a tier2 unit.
On July 22 2010 07:11 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: Tech Switches
Unlike other races where you need to build a whole new production facility to make a new set of units such as a factory a stargate, the zerg only needs to wait on a single tech building and then every single hatch/lair/hive can produce that unit. This makes Zerg the undeniable king of Tech Switching, yes the tech buildings can take quite a while to build but this is to balance out the fact that as soon as it's done there can be 20+ of that unit hatching at any given time.
This kind of rapid unit composition switching is unparalleled by the other races especially terran who has to deal with addons and switching them around if they want to change their unit composition even while dealing with the same units.
This is already offset by the fact that Zerg really has a very limited number of viable combat units compared to T or P. No, Queen doesn't count as a combat unit because really how viable is she in an offensive even supported by creep? So woohoo, we can tech switch, but considering the actual number of options our opponent needs to worry about in a given matchup at a given point in time, this is really not that much of a strong point, sorry.
Is he going to make hydra, or is he gonna make roach for ground? Muta or.. muta for air? Oh boy, the thinking our opponents have to do because of these "tech switches"! Must be so hard...
On July 22 2010 07:11 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: Mobility
The zerg air army can be very frightening when used correctly, creep giving movement boosts when exploited allows for aggressive creep expansion letting the zerg dominate the map early on in the game. Later in the game Nydus networks allow a zerg to move their army from one corner of the map to the other in the blink of an eye. Fungal Growth used effectively can stop the mobility of their opponents completely. Zerg is capable of out maneuvering every other race in the game with the exeption of the use of mass recall by protoss but that has limited uses when compared to a good nydus network setup.
Mobility my ass. The only really fast unit is the zergling and KINDA the mutalisk. Everything else is just OKAY (okay does not qualify as "fast"), when it's not completely terrible off-creep like the hydra. Nydus costs a crapload of resources and is easily spotted by a competent opponent using depots/pylons to cover the outskirts of his bases, not to mention [b]the units coming out one-at-a-time really really limits its viability[b] in situations where the opponent catches you right after it finishes.
Edit: it also severely limits the possibility of using it as a defense mechanism across your various bases.
On July 22 2010 07:11 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: Unit Production
Zerg has the capability to reproduce units faster than any other race with the queen mechanics, larva spit is so completely powerful and watching the top zergs at the moment you will see that even they don't miss larva injections. The zerg macro mechanic is tough to deal with as you have to manage every hatchery seperately requiring a lot more multitasking than warpins or dealing with add-ons. But when done effectively the rate at which a zerg can produce units is rather scary.
This is already offset by the fact that most all of Zerg's unit are weak as shit. Yeah, that's why Zerg is allowed to respawn faster. But clearly, a brilliant mind like you fails to comprehend that at this point in time or thinks we have some really strong point here when the counterbalance is already present. It's different yes, is it a strength? Considering the viability of say, Zerglings compared to SC1's, or the average supply cost of Z units in SC2, I'd say it's really not that big of a deal.
Edit: It was actually a big deal back when we still had a less than 2 supply unit other than the Zergling. But as we all know, it's not the case anymore.
On July 22 2010 07:11 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: Conclusion
Zerg has many mechanics that still have not been used to their fullest:
Typical BS statement that comes off as "hi, you top Zerg players are pretty terrible but it's ok because I'm here to teach you how to use those mechanics to their fullest". Until you go out there and win some tournaments to show us how awesome you are, do us all a favor and refrain from using ridiculous statements like that. We'll all be grateful. It's like you think you're so goddamn smarter than the top Zergs right now, I mean these guys are so dumb they really haven't given those mechanics a try, you know? GOSH!
On July 22 2010 07:11 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:
Larva Injection (yes pros still mess this up)
Transfusion strategies
Contamination
Nydus Networks both offensively and defensively
rofllololol Yeah really, Zerg players are bad because they just haven't thought about using Nydus properly yet, or transfuse! I mean really why don't we just build 50 queens? Also thanks for reminding us that top Zergs are bad at larva injection and that it's part of the problem. I'm not sure how much of a chance that leaves to actual non-pro players to play Zerg semi-competitively, but hey, who gives a shit, I'm Raelcun hear me roar.
On July 22 2010 07:11 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:Ultras are being used in top level play somewhat.
Yeah, when the Zerg player is way ahead and able to dump all these resources into the otherwise borderline useless melee upgrades, Ultras are "somewhat" used. Wonderful. I look forward to seeing your mind-blowing performance as a competitive Zerg player in the near future.
Any other expert advice? Picking up Adrenal Glands maybe? lolol
I don't play zerg primarily (or well), but I have to say I just don't really respect it when I read competitive players (who are in the game to win as opposed to more casual, even if really good folks, who are in primarily to have fun) think they are cool because they play zerg and zerg is underpowered. I mean, if you're in it to win as much as you can then pick a race that you think allows that. For instance, when I hear Artosis channeling IdrA talk about how Terran is OP, I just think "stfu and play Terran then. Do you want a medal for putting yourself at a perceived disadvantage or something?"
For more casual gamers, I totally get that they like the "swarm" and think it's the most fun. And to the extent zerg may really be under-powered or lack diversity or whatever, I'm glad there's pressure on Blizzard to look into that. But for real competitive gamers, I'd say there's no glory in being a martyr; if you pick zerg on purpose you don't get to whine that it's under-powered because then you, a competitive gamer, aren't purposefully maximizing your ability to win.
On July 22 2010 08:53 cucumber wrote: I don't play zerg primarily (or well), but I have to say I just don't really respect it when I read competitive players (who are in the game to win as opposed to more casual, even if really good folks, who are in primarily to have fun) think they are cool because they play zerg and zerg is underpowered. I mean, if you're in it to win as much as you can then pick a race that you think allows that. For instance, when I hear Artosis channeling IdrA talk about how Terran is OP, I just think "stfu and play Terran then. Do you want a medal for putting yourself at a perceived disadvantage or something?"
For more casual gamers, I totally get that they like the "swarm" and think it's the most fun. And to the extent zerg may really be under-powered or lack diversity or whatever, I'm glad there's pressure on Blizzard to look into that. But for real competitive gamers, I'd say there's no glory in being a martyr; if you pick zerg on purpose you don't get to whine that it's under-powered because then you, a competitive gamer, aren't purposefully maximizing your ability to win.
It'll be patched. You don't switch races everytime a different race becomes OP. You'll be severely limiting yourself. I'm not saying it is, but if Terran is hypothetically OP, it doesn't mean you can just pick up the race and suddenly rape face. You have to learn everything about it, etc. making it very inefficient. You won't be able to take advantage of the OPness until you have relearned everything, quite the big switch. But if it continues and nothing changes, THEN you switch.
For example Mech wasn't even viable in the early phases of the beta before Thors could counter mutalisk. Mass Muta wrecked mech because Thors weren't a good counter, you didn't have marines, and turrets were also much weaker. So if all the Terran players switched to Zerg, they'd have to switch back again, etc.
Complaining also gets Blizzard to become aware of potential issues.
FabledIntegral, I understand that and your point is well taken. I'm just talking about long-term whining over the limited scope of a beta. SC2 is in its infancy and if one thinks a certain race is more conducive to winning, and winning as much as possible is your requirement, then you should learn that race rather than think you deserve a medal for playing at a disadvantage (and telling everyone you're at a disadvantage when you lose).
Great post Raelcun. I really think players need to see the potential of all three races after launch before they begin throwing terms like OP and UP around.
Agree, but there are still situations where you need to win in a straight up fight and no amount of backstabbing or mobility will help you. I find it disproportionally easy to walk all over a Z while playing T, while on the other end I'm frantically flanking and doing ridiculous infestor micro to come out even. Plus with sensor towers its nearly impossible to backstab or harass. I don't think ZvT is at the point of being broken, but I definitely would consider it to favor terran, especially before ultralisks or broods are out.
On July 22 2010 07:35 pieisamazing wrote: I want to play zerg, though. I played all the races in brood war (I wasn't very good) but I found all of them to be fun. I tried the other races after playing zerg and they are more interesting and fun.
Zerg, however, is not. This is to say nothing of balance. They just seem so bland in a way that the other two races are not.
amen
i love the zerg look, i love creep and larvae inject, but i hate all zerg units except the infestor and the queen. all others are just really really boring
Best part of playing zerg is taking a map and making it into your own with creep. There is no better feeling then X8ing a replay and just watching the creep spread from your base to your opponent's.
I dont understand it, Me an average platinum player often dont stand a chans against a meching terran, you tell me to use my mobilty,spread creep,nydus,drop,run around with speedlings, tech switch etc. I think for myself, Ok I better do that then, but the problem in my eyes is that the terran (in my level of play) just need to take his nat, get 3 or 4 factories and pump thors and tanks, while I the zerg got to do all that crazy stuff, at the same time. Its not possible for all of us zergs to nydus his bas, while we drop his expo and at the same time tech switch to mutas, lay down another exp and vomit larvae....feels frustrating knowing hes just sitting in his base , waiting for his army to grow so he can end me..
I agree with almost all of your points, and I definitely agree with your overall point that people need so stop saying that Zerg are underpowered.
I will however say one thing as a counterpoint about Zergs mobility in that, in my opinion, Protoss and Terran are so easily able to mitigate this strength with relative ease. This is more prevalent with Terran players turtling behind wall-ins and with bunkers and siege tanks. This seems particularly problematic in the early game, and a quick wall-in can often neutralize speedlings/banelings and removing a good chunk of the available option for a Zerg player.
Now you could switch tactics and try drops/air harass, but in that case, we're not really saying that this is a strength of the zerg, it's just a tactic that any race can have. All three races can utilize this same tactic (albeit to a lesser degree), so it's not a statement about zerg mobility.
It's less of a weakness of zerg than it is a strength of the other races in the way they are designed to easily counter what should be zergs biggest advantage.
Mobility? How much more mobile can you get then warp in tech? Also a bio ball can be quite mobile as well especially with a medic + transport combo.
Sure, zerg can produce more units at the same time if you have the apm to sustain constant larvae inject, but I would hope so as our units are much weaker than protoss'. Think about mass killing units like colossus and HT. They cant wipe out an army incredibly quickly. Also, terran bio can have a new ball up incredibly quickly as well.
Warp-in tech is reliant on pylons, if a zerg can hunt down your pylons with overlords placed in effective places then the mobility from warp-ins are severely limited.
Colossus have their counters and so do HT, terran bio ball can be easily dealt with by zerg and most zergs would rather see a bio ball over a mech ball because a bio ball is easier to deal with. Bio ball gets chain fungal growthed until medivacs are out of energy and they're all low health and then zerg just streams units in to roll them over.
@ Pocketpurple
If a protoss is staying on just warpgate tech and not adding in anything else then they will lose so early game warp ins are almost as good as larva inject but not in the lategame where they have to rely on other units like colossus immortals and possibly stargate units as well. The unique part of the zerg mechanics is they stay true through the entire game.
Not entirely true that warpin relies on pylons, you got the Protoss transport ship whatever it's called that really massivly boosts P mobility, I haven't seen many use it yet tho.
As a low post user and a platinum level player, my argument should probably be taken with a grain of salt.
I am Zerg user and i like the feel of the race a lot. I think it can compete with Terran and Protoss in terms of balance and room for creativity for many of the reasons previously stated in this thread. However, for me, there was a part of the race that was a huge disappointment. I think Blizzard could have made the race a lot more appealing by having more interesting casters. Going from the defiler in Starcraft: Broodwar to the infestor in starcraft 2 was a huge letdown for me. The spells are just not that interesting. Infested Terrans and neural parasite don't compare with dark swarm in terms of opportunities for creative play . The third spell is pretty much a watered down plague which is probably fine for balance reasons.
a little short, but very concise and well written. unfortunately i don't think this will stop the qq threads for zerg or any race. would be swell if you did a write up on the other races anyways =D
On July 22 2010 09:38 DooMDash wrote: I love Zerg in SC2, far from bland. You guys must not have played SC1 original hah.
What? I thought it would be the opposite. People from BW seeing that what made zerg what it was is missing (less swarmy, less mobility unless you're actually good, etc...)
The only thing zerg needs is scourge. Scourge prevent the stupidity that is infinity voidrays or vikings. Scourge also make spire play more versatile. Zerg units have to deal damage quickly, corruptors are not viable units 90% of the time because zerg armies die too fast. Corruptors just take too long to kill things.
On July 22 2010 09:38 DooMDash wrote: I love Zerg in SC2, far from bland. You guys must not have played SC1 original hah.
What? I thought it would be the opposite. People from BW seeing that what made zerg what it was is missing (less swarmy, less mobility unless you're actually good, etc...)
I don't know why you think zerg is less swarmy, other than hydras being more powerful then they were in BW. I still think they feel similar to BW's zerg, and they are actually faster (well lings are) when they are on creep. To be honest I think people are just finding different play styles that are less dependent on numbers and speed with the new hydras, you just have to play a certain way to 100% swarm your opponent.
Thanks for making this thread. The whole "zerg is so weak omg" thing has been getting old very fast, and I really think most people are blowing things way out of proportion.
On July 22 2010 09:43 Floophead_III wrote: The only thing zerg needs is scourge. Scourge prevent the stupidity that is infinity voidrays or vikings. Scourge also make spire play more versatile. Zerg units have to deal damage quickly, corruptors are not viable units 90% of the time because zerg armies die too fast. Corruptors just take too long to kill things.
PLEASE ADD SCOURGE!
That I would like to see. We might not necessarily need them but it would be fun, micro wise.
On July 22 2010 09:38 DooMDash wrote: I love Zerg in SC2, far from bland. You guys must not have played SC1 original hah.
What? I thought it would be the opposite. People from BW seeing that what made zerg what it was is missing (less swarmy, less mobility unless you're actually good, etc...)
I don't know why you think zerg is less swarmy, other than hydras being more powerful then they were in BW. I still think they feel similar to BW's zerg, and they are actually faster (well lings are) when they are on creep. To be honest I think people are just finding different play styles that are less dependent on numbers and speed with the new hydras, you just have to play a certain way to 100% swarm your opponent.
Note that I was just trying to justify why I think some people might be unpleased with zerg. But still, the lack of a really massable unit (bar the lings) just makes it a different feel than SC1 zerg, which is what I think some people might not be liking.
I wouldn't have switched from terran in BW to zerg in sc2 if I didn't find them cool.
I think Raelcun brought up a few really good points and all those people who are saying "who the fuck are you? did you win tournaments or so, if you can't live up to the things you preach just shut the fuck up". Where the hell are you guys coming from? You don't have to play soccer to say, wow, that pass was dumb and you don't need to play the violin in order to commentate on a mistake the musician did that led to a few clunky parts in his play, the only thing you have to do is to somehow understand the concepts and/or see how it can be done in a better way.
And to all those players who are complaining about a lack of diversity in zergs army compositions, you have to feel that way if everything you're relying on is a few zerglings early, sometimes mutalisks and the rest of the time hydra/roach. So as soon as the game is released just press F12 to see that the infestation pit isn't only there to enable hive tech and that upgrading to 3/3 isn't the sole purpose of having a hive.
mhm, i guess after raging for quite a bit, i want to mention a thing that isn't mentioned nearly as often as it should be, because besides granting creep creep tumors do give sight of the area around them, so in the later stages of the game good zergs should always have a good sense of what the opponent is doing and where his army should be at the moment, that combined with the high mobility on creep should lead to even more exploitable situations in which you can damage your opponent badly.
These are all cliches about the Zerg. I'll break it down...
On July 22 2010 07:11 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:
Tech Switches
Unlike other races where you need to build a whole new production facility to make a new set of units such as a factory a stargate, the zerg only needs to wait on a single tech building and then every single hatch/lair/hive can produce that unit. This makes Zerg the undeniable king of Tech Switching, yes the tech buildings can take quite a while to build but this is to balance out the fact that as soon as it's done there can be 20+ of that unit hatching at any given time.
This kind of rapid unit composition switching is unparalleled by the other races especially terran who has to deal with addons and switching them around if they want to change their unit composition even while dealing with the same units.
Not true. Zerg play is very much determined by gas usage. If I was playing mass hydralisks, and I plop down a spire, I cannot suddenly go mass mutalisks (not enough gas). If I want to go ultralisks, I also need more vespene geyers being mined. In order to do this, I need more drones (which takes away more larva). And I need more expansions.
It is a myth that a Zerg player can easily switch from one tech to another. A Zerg player cannot go from Ultralisks to suddenly go Broodlords. A Zerg player is actually heavily invested in a tech direction and is difficult to swap. For proof of this, look at how most Zerg rarely change their direction during a game. They might get air units if collossi or other air units are on the map. They might go hydralisks if enemy air keeps harassing them. But this is no different from any other race.
Zerg are invested in upgrades from overlord upgrades, evolution chamber upgrades, spire upgrades, and all of these push Zerg to stay on their earlier path. Many Zerg go mass hydralisks because hydralisks are good against almost anything. If Zerg tech switching was easy, we wouldn't see mass hydralisks so often.
Mobility
The zerg air army can be very frightening when used correctly, creep giving movement boosts when exploited allows for aggressive creep expansion letting the zerg dominate the map early on in the game. Later in the game Nydus networks allow a zerg to move their army from one corner of the map to the other in the blink of an eye. Fungal Growth used effectively can stop the mobility of their opponents completely. Zerg is capable of out maneuvering every other race in the game with the exeption of the use of mass recall by protoss but that has limited uses when compared to a good nydus network setup.
The 'use Zerg mobility' (against mech) is a myth fabricated by Day[9] which people are erroneously repeating like gospel. Zerg are actually the most immobile race in the game. Here is why:
The Zerg dropship requires two upgrades and, even then, it is the slowest dropship in the game.
Zerg have no units that can attack while cloaked like Banshees or Dark Templars. (Infestors with their one lame spell don't really count.)
Zerg have no cliff traveling units like the Reapers or Colossi which severely punishes Zerg on certain maps.
Some units are absolutely horrible off the creep. Queens never leave the creep, for example. As TLO admitted, hydralisks are bad off the creep.
Nydus Canals are an example of immobility as they are structures that do not move. They are also very expensive and are rarely successful when used offensively.
Since drones and Zerg units come from the same larva, drones being killed is a harsher penalty on Zerg. Replenishing the drone count comes from larva that could have been used to make more units. Because of how fragile losing drones is, Zerg are often sitting in their bases more than they should be.
Protoss and Terran are far more mobile. Terran buildings can literally fly around. Their dropship doubles as a healer. Protoss can literally warp in units from any pylon on the map. The Protoss dropship also doubles as warping in units wherever it is placed.
Saying the Zerg are the 'most mobile' race is absolutely wrong. They are the most immobile race.
Unit Production
Zerg has the capability to reproduce units faster than any other race with the queen mechanics, larva spit is so completely powerful and watching the top zergs at the moment you will see that even they don't miss larva injections. The zerg macro mechanic is tough to deal with as you have to manage every hatchery seperately requiring a lot more multitasking than warpins or dealing with add-ons. But when done effectively the rate at which a zerg can produce units is rather scary.
This is simply not true. This is only true for the late-game. Most of the game, the Zerg is not producing fighting units. The Zerg is often just making drones.
The problem with this 'unit production' notion is that Zerg drones and units all come from the same larva. Protoss and Terran have separate facilities to produce their harvestors and separate facilities to produce their units. This is one reason why unit production is faster for Protoss and Terran in the early and mid game.
And the 'late game' argument doesn't make sense because Zerg usually have more expansions than their opponent. If a Protoss or a Terran has more expansions than their zerg opponent, their unit production will be higher.
My point is that unit production, late game, is determined more by resources, and that unit production is favored in the Terran and Protoss's favor in the early and mid game. The only way for the Zerg to catch up is to expand across the map.
A Protoss with many warp gates will replenish its army way faster than the Zerg and the units can warp straight into the middle of the battlefield.
Conclusion
Zerg has many mechanics that still have not been used to their fullest:
Larva Injection (yes pros still mess this up)
Transfusion strategies
Contamination
Nydus Networks both offensively and defensively
Are you joking?
So until this game is released and players get the time to REALLY get their hands on zerg and play with it and experiment then I don't think it's right to really be commenting on how zerg is broken it doesn't work yada yada.
Who are you to say what people may or may not comment on? And why do you assume Zerg players do not know how to play their own race?
Previously people complained that Ultras werent usable and that they were the reason why zerg didn't have any units and now Ultras are being used in top level play somewhat.
You're missing out the part that Blizzard totally revamped how weapons worked and did constant patches to make the ultralisk more viable.
There might be a few more adjustments to zerg units down the road but for now saying "Zerg sucks fix it now" is a bit of an exaggeration.
This is a strawman argument. That is not what people are saying.
What people absolutely must understand that the problem with the Zerg goes beyond balance. It is that the Zerg are not that fun. When I win as Zerg, I feel more 'lucky' than anything else. Playing Zerg against Terran often is not an enjoyable experience.
The entire purpose of playing a video game is for fun. Zerg players are complaining not because many are losing to, say, Terran mech, but because the game is not fun for them at all in such a situation. It feels like Zerg doesn't have many options.
What Zerg players are saying is that the Zerg race does not feel finished and needs to be fleshed out some more. Blizzard, of course, has their hands tied because all their attention is with launching the game. But after the launch, expect to see Blizzard wade into this issue.
On July 22 2010 07:17 Elmers_Cow wrote: Zergs not broken, just boring. wait... does boring=broken? help me out here
Boring to you, maybe, but that just means they don't match your play style. Thats why there is 2 other races d00d. I LOVE Zerg and their style, macro, macro, macro and everything Raelcun stated above. Thats why I always tell people to quit bitching about how IMBA other races are because they can't play Zerg correctly.
Oh yeah and as stated above, the creep tumors could be called IMBA, they give speed/health bonuses AND when you creep the map you have vision of every thing. When the QQ happens think of that because neither Terran or Protoss can have that much mobility or maphacks.
I find it appalling you make such an assine post that's so full of shit and random talking points then never bother to respond to any post that points out the blatant errors in your line of thinking. The worst of it is you are actually some what involved in the community and cast games, the horror.
i think the spine crawler + queen +creep expansion push has not been explored much. spine are mobile, and are pretty much meant to be used offensively as well. on top of being able to heal them, and being mobile, i think the spine crawler is pretty much the extra zerg unit.
in a game, if players are diligent about creep expansion they can expand it up to the base, plant sunkens, and basically have healable, durable seige tanks (less range than tanks of course, but still).
In straight up unit to unit confrontations, i tseems zerg are usually at a disadvantage against any P ball with colossi or T ball with tanks or splash. of course zerg is pretty much required to flank, but throwing spines into the mix can add a bit of forcing the other race to back off before 12 seconds, as you push and gain ground.
Think about it, 150 minerals for a healable, durable spine crawler will just do a whole lot more than 6 lings. (ling of course will be all about mobility, which is its own niche).
it would seem that the spine crawler can pretty much be used as a medium seige tank.
Zerg are NOT underpowered, just more difficult to play effecitvely. There are 2 main issues:
1) Zerg has no lair tech 'counter' to the long range splash of siege / colossi. This makes the game for the zerg a defensive struggle of poking and harass until you can get the required units out.
2) Because of 1), to play on par with reasonably powerful protoss or terran builds, zerg needs to be more skilled in order to survive to the point of the required units. This means:
Lower league players can execute the t/p build to hurt the z, but z can't play effectively enough to win (most of the time). So there is a skill gap between being able to play t/p long range splash builds, and being able to defend it as z.
I would also like to add that I really really hate when people say "zerg players just need to get better at using zerg mechanics." Is that not a problem in itself? Protoss players literally just have to use chrono boost and maybe be clever with their pylon placements. Raelcun would have zerg players constantly spread creep on every cooldown, use larvae injection on every hatchery with no delay, as well as pop nydus worms all over the map and mass tech switch all game. Am I missing something here? The problem isn't that zerg sucks or is underpowered. The problem is that zerg takes considerably more apm to play and is, as others have said, unenjoyable when trying to break terran.
Tech switches: The Zerg Units don't offer enough diversity to really get an advantage of a tech switch. Also, they have fewer Units than the other Races and it's easier to be prepared for everything Zerg can throw at you.. even if they can tech switch fast.
Mobility: You need Mobility to be able to defend your spreaded Bases. So, often your mobility isn't used offensively, but is necessary to be able to hold off harrass. It's more a necessity than an advantage.
Also, the Maps are really small and there won't be bigger ones in the Ladder Map Pool. Probably, Zerg would easily be the strongest Race if the Maps where as big as in BW, but they said they wanted to keep it small and noobfriendly.
Unit Production: It's the way Zerg works. It can be an advantage, but it's also very hard to manage. It's defenitely where the strenght of Zerg lies. But with all the Harrassement options the other Races have, it's really hard to get a good economy running.
All in all, Zerg has the potential to be quite good, but the opponents seem to have it a little to easy from stopping you to use your advantages.
Could you imagine how purely AWESOME it would be to split 25 scourge into 5 groups, and just instantly decimate 5 colossi? Just thinking about it gives me chills!
First of all i want to say that i'm 60% zerg 40%random during the beta.
So first of all you say, "Unlike other races where you need to build a whole new production facility to make a new set of units such as a factory a stargate, the zerg only needs to wait on a single tech building and then every single hatch/lair/hive can produce that unit. This makes Zerg the undeniable king of Tech Switching, yes the tech buildings can take quite a while to build but this is to balance out the fact that as soon as it's done there can be 20+ of that unit hatching at any given time."
So you're saying that all you have to do is tech to lair and then you can make 20 hydras? no you can't because you have to make a hydra den, so then you have to make mutas, well you got a hydra den and a lair yet still you have to make a spire, so you can say that a factory to make siege tanks is like a hydra den to make hydra, same with starport and spire. You CANNOT make a lair then make any teir 2 units you want.
Then you say "The zerg air army can be very frightening when used correctly, creep giving movement boosts when exploited allows for aggressive creep expansion letting the zerg dominate the map early on in the game." This is true, if you have creep to your expansions you can me mobile to them, but how does creep let you be aggressive at your opponent when even on the smallest maps or closest spawns in the "early game" you cannot use your queens energy to make tumors all the way to the middle of the map, or if you want on 2 bases you can make a 3rd queen but imo i'd like to not waste 150 on that.
And then..."Later in the game Nydus networks allow a zerg to move their army from one corner of the map to the other in the blink of an eye." I dono how many networks you have used, but it is not a "blink of an eye" b/c you can only load 1 unit into the network at a time and it isn't even that fast, THEN you have to spew it all out again on the other side, so yes they can be good on some large maps if you wanna put your army across the map away from you're opponent.
"Zerg is capable of out maneuvering every other race in the game" yes they are capable of it, but how much maneuvering is a protoss or terran going to let you have on steppes of war? or close spawns on kulas?
"Zerg has many mechanics that still have not been used to their fullest:Contamination" Well see the thing is...if you are spending 50minerals and 100gas per overseer, and are getting more than 1-2, you will have a smaller army, ALTHOUGH i do agree in certain situation there might be some strats to constantly delay collosi. ect. but i don't think it is much of a difference.
Ok so thats my "bashing" that i'm going to do, now to say what i agree with what you said. "Zerg has the capability to reproduce units faster than any other race with the queen mechanics, larva spit is so completely powerful and watching the top zergs at the moment you will see that even they don't miss larva injections. The zerg macro mechanic is tough to deal with as you have to manage every hatchery seperately requiring a lot more multitasking than warpins or dealing with add-ons. But when done effectively the rate at which a zerg can produce units is rather scary." I agree with this statement A LOT, but the thing that gets me that i don't like is how ultras took i think 75seconds to make and cost 6 supply. But in sc1 is was 60 seconds and 4 supply. So they take long time to get them out, and Corrupts take 40 seconds to make then another 34 seconds if you plan to make them into tier 3 broodlords, another unit that zerg needs to have late game and doesn't produce that fast and are crucial units.
Don't mean to bash you but these are my thoughts and i don't 100% agree with the things you stated. Maybe you are right and zerg is completely balanced but i feel that there aren't the right maps for zerg and that the fear of them being able to mass expand is gone ( with there being 6workers on gas per base and more workers to saturate the minerals).
On July 22 2010 10:24 Vedreth wrote: Zerg are NOT underpowered, just more difficult to play effecitvely. There are 2 main issues:
1) Zerg has no lair tech 'counter' to the long range splash of siege / colossi. This makes the game for the zerg a defensive struggle of poking and harass until you can get the required units out.
2) Because of 1), to play on par with reasonably powerful protoss or terran builds, zerg needs to be more skilled in order to survive to the point of the required units. This means:
Lower league players can execute the t/p build to hurt the z, but z can't play effectively enough to win (most of the time). So there is a skill gap between being able to play t/p long range splash builds, and being able to defend it as z.
This adds up to the QQ of zerg
roach drop bombs to counter tanks. + mass units
corruptor for collossi. colossi raping any pure ground just means u dont go pure ground.
zerg does require more skill doesnt it? i feel like contaminate, creep expanding, multiple hotkey grouping for flanking, queen spells just means there is a much higher skill cap, and apm requirement, much like how it was for terran in BW.
i really wonder if 12 seconds is realllly necessary. i'd like to see it go down to at least 10 seconds or so for more offensive viability.
6 might have been too offensively oriented but the spine really is the extra zerg units (T and P have more unit types in the game if u dont count spines or spores or queens.
He didn't bring up any points that all top zerg players aren't already aware of and/or trying to abuse.
The only factor Raelcun brought up that I agree is underused is mobility (specifically nydus worms).
Tech switch
One of zerg's biggest advantages but at the same time one of their biggest banes. For an effective tech switch as zerg you need to actually be stockpiling minerals and gas, which leaves you more vulnerable and with less units for a certain timing window.
Example: If you go for a fast spire, you want to save up to 600/600 once the spire finishes. Dealing with and defending from hyperaggressive terrans with hellions/rauders/tanks without enough units becomes really hard and oftentimes you have to sack your timing to be able to survive.
Same thing with any zerg tech switch. Ultralisks? They're to no use unless you've stockpiled 2k minerals and 1500gas so you can build 5-6 of them and upgrade their armor.
Broodlords? In addition to the tech buildings you need to stockpile gas for at least 4-5 corruptors and their morphing to broodlords. What good will 1 or 2 broodlords do?
Tech switching, while it adds depth to the zerg, also adds more trouble in terms of decision making and taking chances than you would expect. Zerg macro isn't as straight forward as terran macro, where you merely need to spend your minerals/gas at a steady rate and produce from a variety of ezmode units that are all useful.
Unit Production The things you wrote don't apply unless it's lategame, you're maxed, and you've got a huge surplus of minerals/gas. No top players produce larva at a slower rate than they mine minerals and harvest gas. Sure, there are occasional screw ups where top players could've had 8 extra roaches or hydras due to missing injections. But this pretty much applies to any race and falls under the category "better macro", rather than miraculous unit replenishing capabilities (since you're limited by the amount of minerals you have).
Conclusion
* Better macro means you can have slightly more units (yes this applies to terran and protoss too) * Obscure healing spell called transfusion (the equivalence of telling terran to repair better to fight the imbalance) * Contamination (i actually agree on this one) * Nydus Networks (Agreed. Problem still persists that you can't ever engage a terran blob though. So wouldn't be of any defensive use unless terran splits their troops to defend and attack at the same time. If they go for a base trade you'd just be donating your units by trying to defend.)
Pretty much everything hinges on actually surviving til the mid and lategame relatively unscathed. I already win enough of the games where I do. The unit production part helps. But I suspect, at the same time, that the strength of the larva inject, is the very reason why Blizzard need to keep zerg units so weak in relative comparison to the other races. Everytime they make them "slightly" too strong, zerg just steamrolls the other races in the mid and late game (because they have an easier time surviving the early game without sustaining damage).
I'd reform the macro mechanics rather than have all zergs learn 1001 ways in which you can avoid a terran death blob. Macro mechanics make timing attacks so strong, that zerg has a hard time "tech switching" without dying. On the other hand, the zerg macro mechanics makes zerg macro so good, that if they survive the early game unscathed, it runs amok; totally out of control. What you're left with are Blizzard, scratching their heads, wondering why tweaking unit stats doesn't help.
On July 22 2010 07:11 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: So until this game is released and players get the time to REALLY get their hands on zerg and play with it and experiment then I don't think it's right to really be commenting on how zerg is broken it doesn't work yada yada. Previously people complained that Ultras werent usable and that they were the reason why zerg didn't have any units and now Ultras are being used in top level play somewhat. There might be a few more adjustments to zerg units down the road but for now saying "Zerg sucks fix it now" is a bit of an exaggeration.
I don't care who you are or how many pros you are in contact with... To come in here and make it sound like Zerg players just don't know how to use the race or just aren't trying is completely ridiculous. Basic statistical knowledge would tell you that skill levels are probably quite evenly spread across all three races, so when a bunch of Zerg players start complaining that x is OP, that is a BIG DEAL.
There are pro players complaining too, and we can certainly assume that they are trying as hard as they can to make the race work.
You can't just come and say:
"Oh, they just need to do this, this and this and they'll be fine!".
"Ah, so all I need to do is that, that and that? Lucky I have this spare 100 APM that I didn't know what to do with before..."
Get real man. There is a real problem here, and glazing over it with bullshit like "Zerg players haven't had the time to REALLY get their hands on Zerg" is just useless. We've been trying just as hard (I think harder) as Terran and Protoss players during the beta.
For the record, I don't think Zerg is underpowered per se. I just think they require a much higher degree of skill to get an even footing against Terran (PvZ is pretty good IMO). This is not how the game should be.
On July 22 2010 10:19 waffling1 wrote: i think the spine crawler + queen +creep expansion push has not been explored much. spine are mobile, and are pretty much meant to be used offensively as well. on top of being able to heal them, and being mobile, i think the spine crawler is pretty much the extra zerg unit.
in a game, if players are diligent about creep expansion they can expand it up to the base, plant sunkens, and basically have healable, durable seige tanks (less range than tanks of course, but still).
In straight up unit to unit confrontations, i tseems zerg are usually at a disadvantage against any P ball with colossi or T ball with tanks or splash. of course zerg is pretty much required to flank, but throwing spines into the mix can add a bit of forcing the other race to back off before 12 seconds, as you push and gain ground.
Think about it, 150 minerals for a healable, durable spine crawler will just do a whole lot more than 6 lings. (ling of course will be all about mobility, which is its own niche).
it would seem that the spine crawler can pretty much be used as a medium seige tank.
also, baneling drops to the econ line. comon.
So basicly what you are saying is that we got a siege tank with less range (1 vs 13), less than half of the movement speed, no splash damage, three times as long siege/root time and it requires creep in order to even work not only this but it drasticly hinders your movement speed across the map.
Tell me again how this is viable since it requires your larva to be used for this cos I sure can't see it.
Oh and it has almost double the attack speed of the tank but I can't see that making up for anything.
Because of the above it's to abusable with drops / warpins from P and T just runns over it no problem. So basicly this is like a double edged sword only the edge which faces your opponent is dull, coated with a thick wooly fabric.
can't say anything about baneling drops kinda hard to pull of unless you do it as a battle takes place elsewhere.
North America is a bunch of complainer who rant over how underpowered Zerg is and Terran mech is imba I'm a Zerg player and I win many match ups fine, fair and dandy In Korea Terran is considered the weakest and Zerg is considered the strongest
On July 22 2010 10:19 waffling1 wrote: i think the spine crawler + queen +creep expansion push has not been explored much. spine are mobile, and are pretty much meant to be used offensively as well. on top of being able to heal them, and being mobile, i think the spine crawler is pretty much the extra zerg unit.
in a game, if players are diligent about creep expansion they can expand it up to the base, plant sunkens, and basically have healable, durable seige tanks (less range than tanks of course, but still).
In straight up unit to unit confrontations, i tseems zerg are usually at a disadvantage against any P ball with colossi or T ball with tanks or splash. of course zerg is pretty much required to flank, but throwing spines into the mix can add a bit of forcing the other race to back off before 12 seconds, as you push and gain ground.
Think about it, 150 minerals for a healable, durable spine crawler will just do a whole lot more than 6 lings. (ling of course will be all about mobility, which is its own niche).
it would seem that the spine crawler can pretty much be used as a medium seige tank.
also, baneling drops to the econ line. comon.
Spinecrawler pushes have been used which is why they nerfed the rooting time from 6 to 12 seconds. It was utilized mostly on the Asian servers, but widely used nonetheless. After the nerf, it has become less popular because it is now much easier to bypass them in the open field. By the time you can utilize this, your opponent has plenty of things to push back with making the tactic not too effective. Baneling drops ARE used but most Zerg are reluctant to drop because it is the most expensive and slowest dropship in the game. Not to mention if I make a mistake I might supply block myself. We're better off with a Nydus most of the time because at least when they blow up in your face, you can recover.
Lot of kids that don't play Zerg at a competitive level in here lol. You know, I don't mean to be rude, but watching current high level play and still being in bronze doesn't change the fact that you're still in bronze. Your race is your set of capabilities, and I haven't really run into a problem that I couldn't solve while using zerg. Until there's a time when a problem surfaces that's completely unworkable, I'll never toot a horn and say zerg is weaker. A lot of you should think more down that vein and stop succumbing to mob mentality.
I think we need to do the top 5 zerg vs the top 5 terran and top 5 protoss (race wars!). im sure zerg wont do as bad as you think
edit:also i would like to add that i think lower skill level players find a harder time playing zerg than terran and protoss would thats why there is so many complaints.
Also, the Maps are really small and there won't be bigger ones in the Ladder Map Pool. Probably, Zerg would easily be the strongest Race if the Maps where as big as in BW, but they said they wanted to keep it small and noobfriendly.
did blizzard really say this or is this just an assumption?
On July 22 2010 08:47 FabledIntegral wrote: I just have a massive problem with the maxed army Zerg, I've had numerous games where I've sat at 200/200 vs a 2 base toss, with tons of minerals to spare, and lost the game. My most recent game I can recall was a game where I gained a massive early base advantage, had 5 base vs 2 base, 200/200 and 5k minerals and 2k gas in the bank. Stupidly, I didn't get an ultra cavern vs the Toss, but instead stuck with Ling/Roach/Hydra (and outupgrading him). As he moved out to secure his third, I burrowed my roaches and popped out on top of his army, and moved in wiht hydra support, but he demolished them. I had around ~35-40 larvae saved up, and instantly started reinforcing. However, his ball was able to come in and power through all my separated weak reinforcements, and he reinforced his ball with warp gate units before mine even hatched. I got annihilated.
Imo, that's just broken. Even if I could have won with Ultralisks (I'm near positive if i just built an ultra cavern and like 10 ultras I could have cleaved with 5 armor through his mass stalker/sentry/colossus ball). But I shouldn't be forced to use them to have even a remote chance at fighting his army of tier 1.
It's moments like that where I just think Zerg is broken lategame, and it's just as bad if not worse vs Terran.
That's what I am feeling too. For Example: Idra vs Huk deciding game on LT Idra was sooo far ahead in money and a little ahead in food, fine with tech and had good positioning (or at least decent in some rare situations). Idra nearly lost although Huk FORGOT RANGE UPGRADE FOR COLOSSI!!! That's just broken. Huk nearly won the fight without the most important upgrade for this playstyle AND Idra was hunting his 6 colossi with 10+ corruptors. When I saw this I just thought about how ridicilous retarded SC2 sometimes can be...
Don't get me wrong, I love the game and I think it's well balanced most of the time, but those situations shouldn't even possibly happen ...
PS: sorry for the typos using different keyboard (@ work)
On July 22 2010 10:19 waffling1 wrote: i think the spine crawler + queen +creep expansion push has not been explored much. spine are mobile, and are pretty much meant to be used offensively as well. on top of being able to heal them, and being mobile, i think the spine crawler is pretty much the extra zerg unit.
in a game, if players are diligent about creep expansion they can expand it up to the base, plant sunkens, and basically have healable, durable seige tanks (less range than tanks of course, but still).
In straight up unit to unit confrontations, i tseems zerg are usually at a disadvantage against any P ball with colossi or T ball with tanks or splash. of course zerg is pretty much required to flank, but throwing spines into the mix can add a bit of forcing the other race to back off before 12 seconds, as you push and gain ground.
Think about it, 150 minerals for a healable, durable spine crawler will just do a whole lot more than 6 lings. (ling of course will be all about mobility, which is its own niche).
it would seem that the spine crawler can pretty much be used as a medium seige tank.
also, baneling drops to the econ line. comon.
Spinecrawler pushes have been used which is why they nerfed the rooting time from 6 to 12 seconds. It was utilized mostly on the Asian servers, but widely used nonetheless. After the nerf, it has become less popular because it is now much easier to bypass them in the open field. By the time you can utilize this, your opponent has plenty of things to push back with making the tactic not too effective. Baneling drops ARE used but most Zerg are reluctant to drop because it is the most expensive and slowest dropship in the game. Not to mention if I make a mistake I might supply block myself. We're better off with a Nydus most of the time because at least when they blow up in your face, you can recover.
I think spine crawler pushes are really a "might as well" thing. Building Spines just to fight with your army might not be the best thing ever but it's not like it's rare to build them for defense. Once you start spreading the creep towards their base, there's no reason not to bring your Spines with you. They're sunkens that walk around, just use them.
On July 22 2010 10:19 waffling1 wrote: i think the spine crawler + queen +creep expansion push has not been explored much. spine are mobile, and are pretty much meant to be used offensively as well. on top of being able to heal them, and being mobile, i think the spine crawler is pretty much the extra zerg unit.
in a game, if players are diligent about creep expansion they can expand it up to the base, plant sunkens, and basically have healable, durable seige tanks (less range than tanks of course, but still).
In straight up unit to unit confrontations, i tseems zerg are usually at a disadvantage against any P ball with colossi or T ball with tanks or splash. of course zerg is pretty much required to flank, but throwing spines into the mix can add a bit of forcing the other race to back off before 12 seconds, as you push and gain ground.
Think about it, 150 minerals for a healable, durable spine crawler will just do a whole lot more than 6 lings. (ling of course will be all about mobility, which is its own niche).
it would seem that the spine crawler can pretty much be used as a medium seige tank.
also, baneling drops to the econ line. comon.
So basicly what you are saying is that we got a siege tank with less range (1 vs 13), less than half of the movement speed, no splash damage, three times as long siege/root time and it requires creep in order to even work not only this but it drasticly hinders your movement speed across the map.
Tell me again how this is viable since it requires your larva to be used for this cos I sure can't see it.
Oh and it has almost double the attack speed of the tank but I can't see that making up for anything.
Because of the above it's to abusable with drops / warpins from P and T just runns over it no problem. So basicly this is like a double edged sword only the edge which faces your opponent is dull, coated with a thick wooly fabric.
can't say anything about baneling drops kinda hard to pull of unless you do it as a battle takes place elsewhere.
i didn't mean that the spine is actually a seige tank. they are definitely not comparable by any means, but a lot of its mechanics and behavior ends up being so.
all i'm saying is that blizzard gave mobility to the zerg defensive structures. it's not being used offensively when it totally can be. plus, a sunken is way more potent than 6 lings later on in the game in various respects. the spine can also bolster the fragility of the zerg ball compared to other balls. a sort of creeping forward and containing with spines can even be experimented with similar to lurkers (of course there is a huge difference with a 12 second burrow time).
say u make a lot of spines for defense. the unique thing about zerg is that they can uproot them, and use them as offense, provided you're diligent about creep. T and P cannot do this. The simple fact that it can be done means it should at least be explored.
There was a game KotB where Idra in game 2 against HuK moved 4 spines spread out to the center of the map on stepps, was able to hold the center much better. he didn't move his spines in range of poking at the wallin, but hey, it's more than leaving the spines back at the base. i think a lot of underutilizing offensive spines has to do with the spillover from BW mentality.
despite not being as long ranged as a tank or colossus, the spine is still the longest ranged ground unit in the zerg arsenal. if u can manage to entrench yourself in a contain, why not poke away at the toss wallin before the period colossi come out? force the issue on the Toss with queens transfusing them as well.
On July 22 2010 08:47 FabledIntegral wrote: I just have a massive problem with the maxed army Zerg, I've had numerous games where I've sat at 200/200 vs a 2 base toss, with tons of minerals to spare, and lost the game. My most recent game I can recall was a game where I gained a massive early base advantage, had 5 base vs 2 base, 200/200 and 5k minerals and 2k gas in the bank. Stupidly, I didn't get an ultra cavern vs the Toss, but instead stuck with Ling/Roach/Hydra (and outupgrading him). As he moved out to secure his third, I burrowed my roaches and popped out on top of his army, and moved in wiht hydra support, but he demolished them. I had around ~35-40 larvae saved up, and instantly started reinforcing. However, his ball was able to come in and power through all my separated weak reinforcements, and he reinforced his ball with warp gate units before mine even hatched. I got annihilated.
Imo, that's just broken. Even if I could have won with Ultralisks (I'm near positive if i just built an ultra cavern and like 10 ultras I could have cleaved with 5 armor through his mass stalker/sentry/colossus ball). But I shouldn't be forced to use them to have even a remote chance at fighting his army of tier 1.
It's moments like that where I just think Zerg is broken lategame, and it's just as bad if not worse vs Terran.
That's what I am feeling too. For Example: Idra vs Huk deciding game on LT Idra was sooo far ahead in money and a little ahead in food, fine with tech and had good positioning (or at least decent in some rare situations). Idra nearly lost although Huk FORGOT RANGE UPGRADE FOR COLOSSI!!! That's just broken. Huk nearly won the fight without the most important upgrade for this playstyle AND Idra was hunting his 6 colossi with 10+ corruptors. When I saw this I just thought about how ridicilous retarded SC2 sometimes can be...
Don't get me wrong, I love the game and I think it's well balanced most of the time, but those situations shouldn't even possibly happen ...
PS: sorry for the typos using different keyboard (@ work)
yeah, that game is not good to reference for any sort of balance discussion indeed ^^
Zerg players' mothers must not have told them about the boy who cried wolf.
Seriously though, there may be balance issues with Zerg, there may not be. We need to wait until these things are more evident and developed and not blow your credibility before the game is even out. Blizzard doesn't make balance changes based on the TL boards so I don't see the point in all the zerg underpowered threads.
Nobody on this game has explored any of the race's possibilities to the fullest. Nowhere even close. The strength of Asian zerg players leads me to believe there's more to zerg than you'd think from reading these forums.
I thought we all knew zerg was good but mainly because the best players tended to go to zerg. we are only behindo n strategy, but we make up for in mechanics. The strategy part isn't or fault, zerg has shifted radically throughout the beta on what units were the base unit and such.
On July 22 2010 10:19 waffling1 wrote: i think the spine crawler + queen +creep expansion push has not been explored much. spine are mobile, and are pretty much meant to be used offensively as well. on top of being able to heal them, and being mobile, i think the spine crawler is pretty much the extra zerg unit.
in a game, if players are diligent about creep expansion they can expand it up to the base, plant sunkens, and basically have healable, durable seige tanks (less range than tanks of course, but still).
In straight up unit to unit confrontations, i tseems zerg are usually at a disadvantage against any P ball with colossi or T ball with tanks or splash. of course zerg is pretty much required to flank, but throwing spines into the mix can add a bit of forcing the other race to back off before 12 seconds, as you push and gain ground.
Think about it, 150 minerals for a healable, durable spine crawler will just do a whole lot more than 6 lings. (ling of course will be all about mobility, which is its own niche).
it would seem that the spine crawler can pretty much be used as a medium seige tank.
also, baneling drops to the econ line. comon.
Spinecrawler pushes have been used which is why they nerfed the rooting time from 6 to 12 seconds. It was utilized mostly on the Asian servers, but widely used nonetheless. After the nerf, it has become less popular because it is now much easier to bypass them in the open field. By the time you can utilize this, your opponent has plenty of things to push back with making the tactic not too effective. Baneling drops ARE used but most Zerg are reluctant to drop because it is the most expensive and slowest dropship in the game. Not to mention if I make a mistake I might supply block myself. We're better off with a Nydus most of the time because at least when they blow up in your face, you can recover.
yeah, i think it just means it's not as fluid, and there is more chance to interrupt it. i think it just means the zerg needs a fuller contain before attempting it, as well as a slower, inching-forward style of leapfrog if it is to be done.
if ur gonna push, and u have creep spread out, might as well use those spines offensively as if they were units. offensive spines don't necessariliy entail that you have to do it as a rush, or that spines have to be your main composition. it's just some extra tanky unit with great bang for the buck.
the benefit of all static structures in any RTS game is that they are tanky and are cost efficient. the drawback is that they cannot be used offensively and is a waste of money in terms of mustering an offensive force.
On July 22 2010 07:54 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: @Fabled, Did you watch Sheth vs Huk? He had Creep at Huk's door on big maps like Lost Temple and Metalopolis in the early game and used that to do aggressive Hydra attacks. To aggressively spread creep you need more than just creep tumours he was using overlords to help them spread faster by having patches of creep for the creep tumour to target by the time the cooldown was ready.
Also Fungal Growth > Dropships so kind of, warp-ins are powerful but usually early on the zerg has a free reign of the map so if they're aggressively hunting down pylons they can't really. Nydus networks have been brought up in the past but usually by people like Avilo who say that you need to make multiple networks and build 10 worms at the same time. Putting one worm in each base and having an infestor ready to fungal growth to delay the army so that you can get your army out to defend is an extremely potent strategy. Yes some of these points have been brought up before but it doesnt change the fact that even the top zergs havent fully utilized all of the race's mechanics.
I watched it, but I don't remember, I'll have to take a look, but I wouldn't personally say lair tech is early game, nor are hydras. Maybe that's where the misunderstanding is.
Personally I feel there is vast amounts of potential in having mass dropships that enable you to drop an entire army in a Zerg main, snipe a hive and some critical tech buildings, and fight the units that are reinforcing into you. Recall that when you do so, you'll have a major positioning advantage when Zerg rushes back to the base, as buildings will be in the way and lings will arrive much faster (and in a line) to your troops, making him have to wait all the way for the other Roaches/Hydras. Merely the threat of a doom drop from Terran is in itself giving the Terran tons of potential (similar to how merely the potential of DT in SC1 forced Terrans to get early turrets). Then you have all your dropships to heal your stimmed units that are taking down the buildings, etc.
Concerning Nyduses, the units come out really slowly, and I doubt with the speed of Terran units that your entire Nydus at multiple bases would be viable, but who knows. We can see with nydus canals in SC1 that usually you don't even have enough army out in time, and the units through the canals come out a million times faster, and you could utilize Dark Swarm and lurkers in small numbers to delay for much more time (fungal... not so much I feel, but I have definitely used it to delay army movement before like you suggest and buy time).
I just have a massive problem with the maxed army Zerg, I've had numerous games where I've sat at 200/200 vs a 2 base toss, with tons of minerals to spare, and lost the game. My most recent game I can recall was a game where I gained a massive early base advantage, had 5 base vs 2 base, 200/200 and 5k minerals and 2k gas in the bank. Stupidly, I didn't get an ultra cavern vs the Toss, but instead stuck with Ling/Roach/Hydra (and outupgrading him). As he moved out to secure his third, I burrowed my roaches and popped out on top of his army, and moved in wiht hydra support, but he demolished them. I had around ~35-40 larvae saved up, and instantly started reinforcing. However, his ball was able to come in and power through all my separated weak reinforcements, and he reinforced his ball with warp gate units before mine even hatched. I got annihilated.
Imo, that's just broken. Even if I could have won with Ultralisks (I'm near positive if i just built an ultra cavern and like 10 ultras I could have cleaved with 5 armor through his mass stalker/sentry/colossus ball). But I shouldn't be forced to use them to have even a remote chance at fighting his army of tier 1.
It's moments like that where I just think Zerg is broken lategame, and it's just as bad if not worse vs Terran.
There's no way in hell a maxed, upgraded 200/200 zerg army of hydra/roach is getting killed by a Protoss tier 1 army. But ignoring that (since you said he had Colossus, meaning its not really a tier 1 army), I can't see how you can call that unfair. Colossus destroy ground if you have like 4. Get a Spire bro.
And if you maxed and banked 5k/2k, he was likely maxed as well. You had the advantage in being able to reinforce because of your bank but it sounds like you just rallied into him and let him kill you piecemeal. Should probably be regrouping.
Just talking based off the description. I'm actually really interested and would love to see a replay if you still have it kicking around somewhere.
On July 22 2010 10:44 Heaven. wrote: North America is a bunch of complainer who rant over how underpowered Zerg is and Terran mech is imba I'm a Zerg player and I win many match ups fine, fair and dandy In Korea Terran is considered the weakest and Zerg is considered the strongest
This isn't true, terran is #1 , zerg a close second and protoss a distant third on asia. unlike US were terran and protoss are close and zerg is a distant third.
On July 22 2010 07:54 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: @Fabled, Did you watch Sheth vs Huk? He had Creep at Huk's door on big maps like Lost Temple and Metalopolis in the early game and used that to do aggressive Hydra attacks. To aggressively spread creep you need more than just creep tumours he was using overlords to help them spread faster by having patches of creep for the creep tumour to target by the time the cooldown was ready.
Also Fungal Growth > Dropships so kind of, warp-ins are powerful but usually early on the zerg has a free reign of the map so if they're aggressively hunting down pylons they can't really. Nydus networks have been brought up in the past but usually by people like Avilo who say that you need to make multiple networks and build 10 worms at the same time. Putting one worm in each base and having an infestor ready to fungal growth to delay the army so that you can get your army out to defend is an extremely potent strategy. Yes some of these points have been brought up before but it doesnt change the fact that even the top zergs havent fully utilized all of the race's mechanics.
I watched it, but I don't remember, I'll have to take a look, but I wouldn't personally say lair tech is early game, nor are hydras. Maybe that's where the misunderstanding is.
Personally I feel there is vast amounts of potential in having mass dropships that enable you to drop an entire army in a Zerg main, snipe a hive and some critical tech buildings, and fight the units that are reinforcing into you. Recall that when you do so, you'll have a major positioning advantage when Zerg rushes back to the base, as buildings will be in the way and lings will arrive much faster (and in a line) to your troops, making him have to wait all the way for the other Roaches/Hydras. Merely the threat of a doom drop from Terran is in itself giving the Terran tons of potential (similar to how merely the potential of DT in SC1 forced Terrans to get early turrets). Then you have all your dropships to heal your stimmed units that are taking down the buildings, etc.
Concerning Nyduses, the units come out really slowly, and I doubt with the speed of Terran units that your entire Nydus at multiple bases would be viable, but who knows. We can see with nydus canals in SC1 that usually you don't even have enough army out in time, and the units through the canals come out a million times faster, and you could utilize Dark Swarm and lurkers in small numbers to delay for much more time (fungal... not so much I feel, but I have definitely used it to delay army movement before like you suggest and buy time).
I just have a massive problem with the maxed army Zerg, I've had numerous games where I've sat at 200/200 vs a 2 base toss, with tons of minerals to spare, and lost the game. My most recent game I can recall was a game where I gained a massive early base advantage, had 5 base vs 2 base, 200/200 and 5k minerals and 2k gas in the bank. Stupidly, I didn't get an ultra cavern vs the Toss, but instead stuck with Ling/Roach/Hydra (and outupgrading him). As he moved out to secure his third, I burrowed my roaches and popped out on top of his army, and moved in wiht hydra support, but he demolished them. I had around ~35-40 larvae saved up, and instantly started reinforcing. However, his ball was able to come in and power through all my separated weak reinforcements, and he reinforced his ball with warp gate units before mine even hatched. I got annihilated.
Imo, that's just broken. Even if I could have won with Ultralisks (I'm near positive if i just built an ultra cavern and like 10 ultras I could have cleaved with 5 armor through his mass stalker/sentry/colossus ball). But I shouldn't be forced to use them to have even a remote chance at fighting his army of tier 1.
It's moments like that where I just think Zerg is broken lategame, and it's just as bad if not worse vs Terran.
Lol you mentioned having to fight stalker/sentry/collosus, they're tier 1.5 and 3 respectively... you onli fought with ling roach and hydras which are tier 1 tier 1.5 and tier 2... of course you need to have something match his collusus. Your army was outclassed and i can say with my modest knowledge; hard countered.
collosus > hydras w(with +2 collosus destroy lings) collosus + stalkers > hydras/roach collosus + stalkers > hydras/roach/lings (forcefield funnels your short range and melee units)
And yes, ultra's would've won you the battle. They would break through force field and allow you a better surround with lings and roaches. It's your fault you did not build that cavern
On July 22 2010 10:44 Heaven. wrote: North America is a bunch of complainer who rant over how underpowered Zerg is and Terran mech is imba I'm a Zerg player and I win many match ups fine, fair and dandy In Korea Terran is considered the weakest and Zerg is considered the strongest
This isn't true, terran is #1 , zerg a close second and protoss a distant third on asia. unlike US were terran and protoss are close and zerg is a distant third.
Source please? I actually remmebr day9 talking about this in one of his cast where he said that zerg is much stronger in asia. But wether that's because Zerg is actually stronger in Asia or Terran and Protoss are weaker than US remains to be seen. BUT he DID state that zerg is stronger in asia compared to the T/P there.
On July 22 2010 10:44 Heaven. wrote: North America is a bunch of complainer who rant over how underpowered Zerg is and Terran mech is imba I'm a Zerg player and I win many match ups fine, fair and dandy In Korea Terran is considered the weakest and Zerg is considered the strongest
This isn't true, terran is #1 , zerg a close second and protoss a distant third on asia. unlike US were terran and protoss are close and zerg is a distant third.
Source please? I actually remmebr day9 talking about this in one of his cast where he said that zerg is much stronger in asia. But wether that's because Zerg is actually stronger in Asia or Terran and Protoss are weaker than US remains to be seen. BUT he DID state that zerg is stronger in asia compared to the T/P there.
On July 22 2010 10:44 Heaven. wrote: North America is a bunch of complainer who rant over how underpowered Zerg is and Terran mech is imba I'm a Zerg player and I win many match ups fine, fair and dandy In Korea Terran is considered the weakest and Zerg is considered the strongest
This isn't true, terran is #1 , zerg a close second and protoss a distant third on asia. unlike US were terran and protoss are close and zerg is a distant third.
Source please? I actually remmebr day9 talking about this in one of his cast where he said that zerg is much stronger in asia. But wether that's because Zerg is actually stronger in Asia or Terran and Protoss are weaker than US remains to be seen. BUT he DID state that zerg is stronger in asia compared to the T/P there.
I'm pretty sure it was in one of the earlier Day9 beta dailes (proably around patch 3/4), because I also remember listening to one of the State of the Beta podcasts where Artosis was venting about Terran mech vs Z, saying that most Zs on Asia were changing to T. Of course, that was right at the end of phase one, so it's still outdated news.
Also, the Maps are really small and there won't be bigger ones in the Ladder Map Pool. Probably, Zerg would easily be the strongest Race if the Maps where as big as in BW, but they said they wanted to keep it small and noobfriendly.
did blizzard really say this or is this just an assumption?
The last time we got any statistics to back up the claim that Asian Zergs were "dominating" was well over a month ago. Plus, I'm willing to bet that none of you who make these claims play on the Asia server. Also, compare the top Korean Zergs to the top Korean Terrans and Protosses. For Zergs, we have what, Cool and Check? Maybe Zenio? Terran: IntoTheRainbow, TheStc (who just beat Cool in the most recent Korean online tournament), Ensane, Maka, Hannibal. And for Protoss you have Tester, enough said. So how are Asian Zergs "dominating?"
On July 22 2010 10:44 Heaven. wrote: North America is a bunch of complainer who rant over how underpowered Zerg is and Terran mech is imba I'm a Zerg player and I win many match ups fine, fair and dandy In Korea Terran is considered the weakest and Zerg is considered the strongest
This isn't true, terran is #1 , zerg a close second and protoss a distant third on asia. unlike US were terran and protoss are close and zerg is a distant third.
Source please? I actually remmebr day9 talking about this in one of his cast where he said that zerg is much stronger in asia. But wether that's because Zerg is actually stronger in Asia or Terran and Protoss are weaker than US remains to be seen. BUT he DID state that zerg is stronger in asia compared to the T/P there.
I'm pretty sure it was in one of the earlier Day9 beta dailes (proably around patch 3/4), because I also remember listening to one of the State of the Beta podcasts where Artosis was venting about Terran mech vs Z, saying that most Zs on Asia were changing to T. Of course, that was right at the end of phase one, so it's still outdated news.
Maybe Zerg was stronger in Asia two months ago when it was still on patch 9. But the game has developed since then.
On July 22 2010 10:19 waffling1 wrote: i think the spine crawler + queen +creep expansion push has not been explored much. spine are mobile, and are pretty much meant to be used offensively as well. on top of being able to heal them, and being mobile, i think the spine crawler is pretty much the extra zerg unit.
in a game, if players are diligent about creep expansion they can expand it up to the base, plant sunkens, and basically have healable, durable seige tanks (less range than tanks of course, but still).
In straight up unit to unit confrontations, i tseems zerg are usually at a disadvantage against any P ball with colossi or T ball with tanks or splash. of course zerg is pretty much required to flank, but throwing spines into the mix can add a bit of forcing the other race to back off before 12 seconds, as you push and gain ground.
Think about it, 150 minerals for a healable, durable spine crawler will just do a whole lot more than 6 lings. (ling of course will be all about mobility, which is its own niche).
it would seem that the spine crawler can pretty much be used as a medium seige tank.
also, baneling drops to the econ line. comon.
So basicly what you are saying is that we got a siege tank with less range (1 vs 13), less than half of the movement speed, no splash damage, three times as long siege/root time and it requires creep in order to even work not only this but it drasticly hinders your movement speed across the map.
Tell me again how this is viable since it requires your larva to be used for this cos I sure can't see it.
Oh and it has almost double the attack speed of the tank but I can't see that making up for anything.
Because of the above it's to abusable with drops / warpins from P and T just runns over it no problem. So basicly this is like a double edged sword only the edge which faces your opponent is dull, coated with a thick wooly fabric.
can't say anything about baneling drops kinda hard to pull of unless you do it as a battle takes place elsewhere.
i didn't mean that the spine is actually a seige tank. they are definitely not comparable by any means, but a lot of its mechanics and behavior ends up being so.
all i'm saying is that blizzard gave mobility to the zerg defensive structures. it's not being used offensively when it totally can be. plus, a sunken is way more potent than 6 lings later on in the game in various respects. the spine can also bolster the fragility of the zerg ball compared to other balls. a sort of creeping forward and containing with spines can even be experimented with similar to lurkers (of course there is a huge difference with a 12 second burrow time).
say u make a lot of spines for defense. the unique thing about zerg is that they can uproot them, and use them as offense, provided you're diligent about creep. T and P cannot do this. The simple fact that it can be done means it should at least be explored.
There was a game KotB where Idra in game 2 against HuK moved 4 spines spread out to the center of the map on stepps, was able to hold the center much better. he didn't move his spines in range of poking at the wallin, but hey, it's more than leaving the spines back at the base. i think a lot of underutilizing offensive spines has to do with the spillover from BW mentality.
despite not being as long ranged as a tank or colossus, the spine is still the longest ranged ground unit in the zerg arsenal. if u can manage to entrench yourself in a contain, why not poke away at the toss wallin before the period colossi come out? force the issue on the Toss with queens transfusing them as well.
Ok so I think what you are getting at a little bit more, I can sort of see them really useful if the opponent doesn't have air and you place them behind the tall grass, that way tumors that are infront of the grass give vision 2 them. however with the root time being 12 secs and them only having a speed of 1 I can't really see them used in any pushes except as sacrificial lambs allowing your army to retreat.
It still feels like it severly limits the speed at which you can move around tho.
On July 22 2010 10:19 waffling1 wrote: i think the spine crawler + queen +creep expansion push has not been explored much. spine are mobile, and are pretty much meant to be used offensively as well. on top of being able to heal them, and being mobile, i think the spine crawler is pretty much the extra zerg unit.
in a game, if players are diligent about creep expansion they can expand it up to the base, plant sunkens, and basically have healable, durable seige tanks (less range than tanks of course, but still).
In straight up unit to unit confrontations, i tseems zerg are usually at a disadvantage against any P ball with colossi or T ball with tanks or splash. of course zerg is pretty much required to flank, but throwing spines into the mix can add a bit of forcing the other race to back off before 12 seconds, as you push and gain ground.
Think about it, 150 minerals for a healable, durable spine crawler will just do a whole lot more than 6 lings. (ling of course will be all about mobility, which is its own niche).
it would seem that the spine crawler can pretty much be used as a medium seige tank.
also, baneling drops to the econ line. comon.
Wrong. Spine crawler mobility has been nerfed, because Blizzard has specifically said they do not see it as an offensive unit. They are meant to be base defenses, and the movement is mainly for moving them from one base to another, or reposition them into choke points.
Hitting an enemy base with spine crawlers is very rarely useful, if at all.
On July 22 2010 07:54 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: @Fabled, Did you watch Sheth vs Huk? He had Creep at Huk's door on big maps like Lost Temple and Metalopolis in the early game and used that to do aggressive Hydra attacks. To aggressively spread creep you need more than just creep tumours he was using overlords to help them spread faster by having patches of creep for the creep tumour to target by the time the cooldown was ready.
Also Fungal Growth > Dropships so kind of, warp-ins are powerful but usually early on the zerg has a free reign of the map so if they're aggressively hunting down pylons they can't really. Nydus networks have been brought up in the past but usually by people like Avilo who say that you need to make multiple networks and build 10 worms at the same time. Putting one worm in each base and having an infestor ready to fungal growth to delay the army so that you can get your army out to defend is an extremely potent strategy. Yes some of these points have been brought up before but it doesnt change the fact that even the top zergs havent fully utilized all of the race's mechanics.
I watched it, but I don't remember, I'll have to take a look, but I wouldn't personally say lair tech is early game, nor are hydras. Maybe that's where the misunderstanding is.
Personally I feel there is vast amounts of potential in having mass dropships that enable you to drop an entire army in a Zerg main, snipe a hive and some critical tech buildings, and fight the units that are reinforcing into you. Recall that when you do so, you'll have a major positioning advantage when Zerg rushes back to the base, as buildings will be in the way and lings will arrive much faster (and in a line) to your troops, making him have to wait all the way for the other Roaches/Hydras. Merely the threat of a doom drop from Terran is in itself giving the Terran tons of potential (similar to how merely the potential of DT in SC1 forced Terrans to get early turrets). Then you have all your dropships to heal your stimmed units that are taking down the buildings, etc.
Concerning Nyduses, the units come out really slowly, and I doubt with the speed of Terran units that your entire Nydus at multiple bases would be viable, but who knows. We can see with nydus canals in SC1 that usually you don't even have enough army out in time, and the units through the canals come out a million times faster, and you could utilize Dark Swarm and lurkers in small numbers to delay for much more time (fungal... not so much I feel, but I have definitely used it to delay army movement before like you suggest and buy time).
I just have a massive problem with the maxed army Zerg, I've had numerous games where I've sat at 200/200 vs a 2 base toss, with tons of minerals to spare, and lost the game. My most recent game I can recall was a game where I gained a massive early base advantage, had 5 base vs 2 base, 200/200 and 5k minerals and 2k gas in the bank. Stupidly, I didn't get an ultra cavern vs the Toss, but instead stuck with Ling/Roach/Hydra (and outupgrading him). As he moved out to secure his third, I burrowed my roaches and popped out on top of his army, and moved in wiht hydra support, but he demolished them. I had around ~35-40 larvae saved up, and instantly started reinforcing. However, his ball was able to come in and power through all my separated weak reinforcements, and he reinforced his ball with warp gate units before mine even hatched. I got annihilated.
Imo, that's just broken. Even if I could have won with Ultralisks (I'm near positive if i just built an ultra cavern and like 10 ultras I could have cleaved with 5 armor through his mass stalker/sentry/colossus ball). But I shouldn't be forced to use them to have even a remote chance at fighting his army of tier 1.
It's moments like that where I just think Zerg is broken lategame, and it's just as bad if not worse vs Terran.
Lol you mentioned having to fight stalker/sentry/collosus, they're tier 1.5 and 3 respectively... you onli fought with ling roach and hydras which are tier 1 tier 1.5 and tier 2... of course you need to have something match his collusus. Your army was outclassed and i can say with my modest knowledge; hard countered.
collosus > hydras w(with +2 collosus destroy lings) collosus + stalkers > hydras/roach collosus + stalkers > hydras/roach/lings (forcefield funnels your short range and melee units)
And yes, ultra's would've won you the battle. They would break through force field and allow you a better surround with lings and roaches. It's your fault you did not build that cavern
Forgot to include I had infestors too - anywho.
Point is - doesn't mean his army should shit all over yours. Roach/Hydra are both staple units in the Zerg arsenal. Not by any means saying they should win, but when they don't make a dent, there is a problem.
His army also wasn't maxed, he was severely outplayed early game, I believe he two gated vs my 15 hatch (cross positions) and his zealots didn't do anything (he mismicroed his first zealot, I killed it with my first 6 lings, didn't lose any lings, and then proceeded to kill like another 4 zealots with lings and then took a third before he took his second).
If you throw 200/200 at something like 150/200, the smaller tier should win. Nonetheless, that's not 6the point I'm trying to make. The point I'm trying to make is the "attack in multiple waves" is retarded. I couldn't reinforce my army before his army just rolled over mine.
Zerg was fundamentally "throw a lot of shit at the enemy, outexpand him, etc." It's not like that all anymore, and doesn't feel zergy, and the entire "oh it feels swarmy when you come in with a second wave ASAP" is not only a retarded concept, but it's incredibly situational. I simply hate the lategame system, but I enjoy the early-midgame.
The last time we got any statistics to back up the claim that Asian Zergs were "dominating" was well over a month ago. Plus, I'm willing to bet that none of you who make these claims play on the Asia server. Also, compare the top Korean Zergs to the top Korean Terrans and Protosses. For Zergs, we have what, Cool and Check? Maybe Zenio? Terran: IntoTheRainbow, TheStc (who just beat Cool in the most recent Korean online tournament), Ensane, Maka, Hannibal. And for Protoss you have Tester, enough said. So how are Asian Zergs "dominating?"
I'm a Zerg player, and that link in your post is becoming my sig. It's just amazing how many people are still echoing what Dustin Browder said in a video interview like 3 months ago.
i agree about the tech swapping up until u mention ZvT simply because no matter what i go if he has thors its kinda meh. overall i feel in the mid game they are the weakest of the 3 races simply because u cant have all that tech and still be alive so u have to stick with 1 and hold off your opponent until new tech kicks in or you kill him with ur first tech choice
There really weren't any big tournaments in phase 2, but definitely Zerg was dominating in tournaments at the very end of phase 1 in Asia. The last ASM, done right before the end of phase 1, had
The biggest tournament in phase 2 I guess was the WTA, which had 1. Terran, 2. Zerg, 3. Zerg, 4. Terran for its top 4.
It's tough to say Zerg is still dominating in Asia, since we really didn't get enough time with phase 2 (not even two weeks). But definitely there's no real reason to think that Zerg's domination in Asia has stopped, either.
The last time we got any statistics to back up the claim that Asian Zergs were "dominating" was well over a month ago. Plus, I'm willing to bet that none of you who make these claims play on the Asia server. Also, compare the top Korean Zergs to the top Korean Terrans and Protosses. For Zergs, we have what, Cool and Check? Maybe Zenio? Terran: IntoTheRainbow, TheStc (who just beat Cool in the most recent Korean online tournament), Ensane, Maka, Hannibal. And for Protoss you have Tester, enough said. So how are Asian Zergs "dominating?"
Not that this was addressed to me, but I'm not saying that. I'm saying if zerg is under-powered then stop playing it and tell Blizzard why you're stopping. No one is forcing anyone to play a race with which they think they can't win.
The last time we got any statistics to back up the claim that Asian Zergs were "dominating" was well over a month ago. Plus, I'm willing to bet that none of you who make these claims play on the Asia server. Also, compare the top Korean Zergs to the top Korean Terrans and Protosses. For Zergs, we have what, Cool and Check? Maybe Zenio? Terran: IntoTheRainbow, TheStc (who just beat Cool in the most recent Korean online tournament), Ensane, Maka, Hannibal. And for Protoss you have Tester, enough said. So how are Asian Zergs "dominating?"
Not that this was addressed to me, but I'm not saying that. I'm saying if zerg is under-powered then stop playing it and tell Blizzard why you're stopping. No one is forcing anyone to play a race with which they think they can't win.
Azile, I'm going to explain this to you like baby-food, since that's apparently what you need. If you're playing competitively don't play to whine; play to win.
1) If zerg can't compete 2) then zerg won't 3) people will notice 4) Blizzard will compensate and make zerg better
Understand? GREAT!!!
All I'm otherwise saying is that pro gamers should pick races and strategies that allow them to win and they don't get to whine about their race when they lose. Because they themselves picked it. If you're a competitive gamer, then don't play zerg if you think it's not the best to win. If you pick it and you don't think it's the best to win and then you whine whine whine? Then f you. Pick the race that lets you win.
If, on the other hand, you want to play SC2 for fun, and you want to play zerg, and you think zerg needs more diversity or more/different stuff to be the 'swarm' then by all means tell us and Blizzard and everyone to make the changes happen.
Just don't play pro and tell me you're a martyr. Because that means you're a tool.
If you throw 200/200 at something like 150/200, the smaller tier should win. Nonetheless, that's not 6the point I'm trying to make. The point I'm trying to make is the "attack in multiple waves" is retarded. I couldn't reinforce my army before his army just rolled over mine.
Zerg was fundamentally "throw a lot of shit at the enemy, outexpand him, etc." It's not like that all anymore, and doesn't feel zergy, and the entire "oh it feels swarmy when you come in with a second wave ASAP" is not only a retarded concept, but it's incredibly situational. I simply hate the lategame system, but I enjoy the early-midgame.
You said you had more bases how many more drones did you have? I am going to guess that your actual army sizes werent so different and you said yourself you refused to build your tier three units or even get some corrupters whereas he had invested in higher tier units.
How many warp gates did he have ten maybe? Thats what about ten reinforcements compared to your 45 saved up larvae?
If you throw 200/200 at something like 150/200, the smaller tier should win. Nonetheless, that's not 6the point I'm trying to make. The point I'm trying to make is the "attack in multiple waves" is retarded. I couldn't reinforce my army before his army just rolled over mine.
Zerg was fundamentally "throw a lot of shit at the enemy, outexpand him, etc." It's not like that all anymore, and doesn't feel zergy, and the entire "oh it feels swarmy when you come in with a second wave ASAP" is not only a retarded concept, but it's incredibly situational. I simply hate the lategame system, but I enjoy the early-midgame.
You said you had more bases how many more drones did you have? I am going to guess that your actual army sizes werent so different and you said yourself you refused to build your tier three units or even get some corrupters whereas he had invested in higher tier units.
How many warp gates did he have ten maybe? Thats what about ten reinforcements compared to your 45 saved up larvae?
If I could have managed to have all 45 larvae spawn units in the same area, I probably could have held it off with a second and third wave. Unfortunately, he just raped my bases 1 by 1 and I couldn't actually group up an army, that was the problem. Immediately after raping me in the middle of LT, he immediately went to my gold, which had 5 spines defending, ran over them and moved into my nat. Admittedly a few units died due to my previous rallies, but it was my inability to recoup my army like they say you should. I've lost many games due to this.
As I've said, I definitely screwed up with not having corrupters or ultras. BUT the point is, I feel people aren't giving enough credit to what a fully maxed ling/roach/hydra army *should* accomplish. It should do *something*.
PS. If he had 10 warpgates that's probably 2 waves of reinforcements by the time my first one comes through (especially if he chronos), which is a 40 supply reinforcement... lol. And his units all spawn in the same area T_T.
Don't remember what my drone count was but none of my bases were fully saturated, I just transferred drones from my first 3 bases to my later two. Still probably a lot, however. Even with a full 20 less drones though, that's only 10 more units.
raelcun your awesome man, but you how people are, mostly from north american region, cry instead of trying to find ways to make things work. keep fightin bruh. i have to say when i played on asia server zerg is like a different race, those dudes know they're starcraft!
On July 22 2010 10:44 Heaven. wrote: North America is a bunch of complainer who rant over how underpowered Zerg is and Terran mech is imba I'm a Zerg player and I win many match ups fine, fair and dandy In Korea Terran is considered the weakest and Zerg is considered the strongest
Flat out lie. Don't post something you don't know anything about. the race split up (top 50) on the asia server is
19: T 16: P 13: Z 2: R
While I win a fair amount of ZvP I feel that I have to out play my Terran opponent heavily to win. You pretty much need to harass heavily with zerglings, open mutas to make them turtle more then take 3-4 bases to their 1-2 plus out playing heavily in major battles, scout all of their tech and defend their harass.
Furthermore when you have Pro players calling imba while other pros are refusing to use the terminology but still acknowledge that things need to be tweeked it's easy to see that something is astray. Sure eventually the meta will change and that will change the dynamic of the MU but their has to be a real strategy from Z to make the T change anything about their play (Harass is the only thing I can think of).
The thing that I would like to see is making one of Z's units 1 food again (like hydra was in sc:bw or roach was pre patch 13) but make sure it doesn't affect the ZvP MU too much (ZvZ is still growing quite a bit, but baneling play is annoying).
On July 22 2010 10:44 Heaven. wrote: North America is a bunch of complainer who rant over how underpowered Zerg is and Terran mech is imba I'm a Zerg player and I win many match ups fine, fair and dandy In Korea Terran is considered the weakest and Zerg is considered the strongest
Flat out lie. Don't post something you don't know anything about. the race split up (top 50) on the asia server is
19: T 16: P 13: Z 2: R
While I win a fair amount of ZvP I feel that I have to out play my Terran opponent heavily to win. You pretty much need to harass heavily with zerglings, open mutas to make them turtle more then take 3-4 bases to their 1-2 plus out playing heavily in major battles, scout all of their tech and defend their harass.
Furthermore when you have Pro players calling imba while other pros are refusing to use the terminology but still acknowledge that things need to be tweeked it's easy to see that something is astray. Sure eventually the meta will change and that will change the dynamic of the MU but their has to be a real strategy from Z to make the T change anything about their play (Harass is the only thing I can think of).
The thing that I would like to see is making one of Z's units 1 food again (like hydra was in sc:bw or roach was pre patch 13) but make sure it doesn't affect the ZvP MU too much (ZvZ is still growing quite a bit, but baneling play is annoying).
Just wanted to point out it is: 15 T 21 P 13 Z 1 R In Asia.
On July 19 2010 09:28 Hidden_MotiveS wrote: Thanks for the link, jokah, and thanks to martinni for updating the list. Of the 3635 players in asia diamond division 1v1.
1244 are protoss
1187 are terran
750 are zerg
454 are random
So
34.22% are protoss
32.65% are terran
20.63% are zerg and
12.49% are random
Observations:
The number of zerg is less than what we've all been told. Perhaps next time everyone (myself included) will try not to fall prey to rumors anymore.
Used source data, word, and replace tool to find the number of players in each category
Don't go about posting definite conclusions to this information, we don't know very much yet
I don't know if martinni has updated his list of asian players in diamond division completely.
20.63% diamond player pool zerg and 13 of them in top 50. Yes, terran and protoss have more in top 50 but 12%+ more players.
On July 22 2010 10:44 Heaven. wrote: North America is a bunch of complainer who rant over how underpowered Zerg is and Terran mech is imba I'm a Zerg player and I win many match ups fine, fair and dandy In Korea Terran is considered the weakest and Zerg is considered the strongest
Flat out lie. Don't post something you don't know anything about. the race split up (top 50) on the asia server is
19: T 16: P 13: Z 2: R
While I win a fair amount of ZvP I feel that I have to out play my Terran opponent heavily to win. You pretty much need to harass heavily with zerglings, open mutas to make them turtle more then take 3-4 bases to their 1-2 plus out playing heavily in major battles, scout all of their tech and defend their harass.
Furthermore when you have Pro players calling imba while other pros are refusing to use the terminology but still acknowledge that things need to be tweeked it's easy to see that something is astray. Sure eventually the meta will change and that will change the dynamic of the MU but their has to be a real strategy from Z to make the T change anything about their play (Harass is the only thing I can think of).
The thing that I would like to see is making one of Z's units 1 food again (like hydra was in sc:bw or roach was pre patch 13) but make sure it doesn't affect the ZvP MU too much (ZvZ is still growing quite a bit, but baneling play is annoying).
Just wanted to point out it is: 15 T 21 P 13 Z 1 R In Asia.
credit to: http://sc2.vacau.com/sc2/krranks.php
Odd how they are so clustered. Top 5 has 4/5 Terran + 1 Toss. But top 20 starts to incorporate a lot more Zerg (8/20). Then the next 15 (21 - 35) are 13 Protoss 1 Terran 1 Random.
Weirddd. So looks like Terran are at the VERY top, then Zerg after the Top 10, then Mass protoss around 20 onward.
On July 22 2010 10:44 Heaven. wrote: North America is a bunch of complainer who rant over how underpowered Zerg is and Terran mech is imba I'm a Zerg player and I win many match ups fine, fair and dandy In Korea Terran is considered the weakest and Zerg is considered the strongest
Flat out lie. Don't post something you don't know anything about. the race split up (top 50) on the asia server is
19: T 16: P 13: Z 2: R
While I win a fair amount of ZvP I feel that I have to out play my Terran opponent heavily to win. You pretty much need to harass heavily with zerglings, open mutas to make them turtle more then take 3-4 bases to their 1-2 plus out playing heavily in major battles, scout all of their tech and defend their harass.
Furthermore when you have Pro players calling imba while other pros are refusing to use the terminology but still acknowledge that things need to be tweeked it's easy to see that something is astray. Sure eventually the meta will change and that will change the dynamic of the MU but their has to be a real strategy from Z to make the T change anything about their play (Harass is the only thing I can think of).
The thing that I would like to see is making one of Z's units 1 food again (like hydra was in sc:bw or roach was pre patch 13) but make sure it doesn't affect the ZvP MU too much (ZvZ is still growing quite a bit, but baneling play is annoying).
I get you, i really do because you honestly have to outplay them by using zerg's potential. Mech has limited play as its slow and clunky, it's depressing facing it but I KNOW that we have options to explore they are just harder to implement! Zerg is not underpowered it's just harder to play and to lesser skilled players it would seem otherwise because they will never reach that potential. Those who argue otherwise see what I see, what can be done if you eek out just a bit more here and there and voila you can beat mech and it goes downhill.
It's a plateau effect once you've beaten mech soundly you can emulate that same procedure in every game because Terrans feel comfortable playing the same playstyle.
Blizzard has to collect insurmountable amount of data to make a game feel balance on all levels, every month this game will be out meta games will change peoples thought patterns and skills will develop. The entire multiplayer will be a sentient being due to that and you need to understand that what seems obvious from your perspective is COMPLETELY different from another.
For example, I change my game up and manage to beat 10 meching terrans in a row because I can extort a weakness. However a fellow Zerg has just lost 10 games against the same meching terrans because he continues to follow the standard meta game for zerg. You will have 3 separate opinions that swear they are correct
1. Zerg can beat mech all the time 2. Mech is OP Zerg has no hope 3. Mech is fine I win about 50% of the time
You swiftly go to the nearest forum and complain with a reasonable explanation as to why its unbalanced/balanced with replays to prove it! YOU FEEL VERY STRONGLY ABOUT THIS BECAUSE OF YOUR PERSONAL EXPERIENCE
On July 22 2010 12:22 cucumber wrote: Azile, I'm going to explain this to you like baby-food, since that's apparently what you need. If you're playing competitively don't play to whine; play to win.
1) If zerg can't compete 2) then zerg won't 3) people will notice 4) Blizzard will compensate and make zerg better
Understand? GREAT!!!
All I'm otherwise saying is that pro gamers should pick races and strategies that allow them to win and they don't get to whine about their race when they lose. Because they themselves picked it. If you're a competitive gamer, then don't play zerg if you think it's not the best to win. If you pick it and you don't think it's the best to win and then you whine whine whine? Then f you. Pick the race that lets you win.
If, on the other hand, you want to play SC2 for fun, and you want to play zerg, and you think zerg needs more diversity or more/different stuff to be the 'swarm' then by all means tell us and Blizzard and everyone to make the changes happen.
Just don't play pro and tell me you're a martyr. Because that means you're a tool.
That would be assuming anyone else joins in your boycotting zerg. Furthermore you conveniently neglected the previous post that countered yours and that is it takes a LONG time to fully master another race. You SHOULD be better off practicing zerg until you can play it blindfolded because the races should be equal. If your solution is to switch to Terran because zerg is UP then instead of switching to terran you should work on proposing the correct buff that the zerg would need.
TBH I haven't and won't call IMBA on anything in SC2. The game hasn't even come out yet and blizz did a great job making sc:bw balanced, I don't think they will leave this hanging. I will say that the ZvT is disproportionately difficult and the zerg unit composition is lacking a 1f proficient unit (ie Hydra sc:bw)
On July 22 2010 12:22 cucumber wrote: Azile, I'm going to explain this to you like baby-food, since that's apparently what you need. If you're playing competitively don't play to whine; play to win.
1) If zerg can't compete 2) then zerg won't 3) people will notice 4) Blizzard will compensate and make zerg better
Understand? GREAT!!!
All I'm otherwise saying is that pro gamers should pick races and strategies that allow them to win and they don't get to whine about their race when they lose. Because they themselves picked it. If you're a competitive gamer, then don't play zerg if you think it's not the best to win. If you pick it and you don't think it's the best to win and then you whine whine whine? Then f you. Pick the race that lets you win.
If, on the other hand, you want to play SC2 for fun, and you want to play zerg, and you think zerg needs more diversity or more/different stuff to be the 'swarm' then by all means tell us and Blizzard and everyone to make the changes happen.
Just don't play pro and tell me you're a martyr. Because that means you're a tool.
Dude, just stop it. Your arguments are, for lack of a better word, stupid.
No "competitive gamer" will switch races on a whim. It's like telling a defender in soccer to start playing as an attacker because "if there's no glory in defending, stop whiniing and pick what gets you the glory".
You do not simply learn how to play a new race in 1 day, just like you do not switch position/role in football or basketball because your current one isn't the "best" or "easiest" one. You hang in there trying to find new ways to improve. Perhaps, after extensive discussions and debates within your sport, rule changes emerge to promote fair and better play (like referee's cracking down on holdings or whatever fouls).
Now stop spewing your irrelevant off topic bullshit over this thread. Asking competitive zerg players to switch races is not something that furthers constructive discussion. Only possible prospect the type of posts you write have got are starting flame wars.
I think the reason zerg is considered kinda weak right now are the bloody maps. Some are just SO SMALL. I mean there is hardly any map in the pool that is actually as big as a normal sc1 map. Flanking is too hard on most maps and stalling the map in time to get expansions up etc almost never work. Terran and Protoss timing pushes become overpowered on some maps because of this. I hope they get rid of like 90% of the maps right away.
On July 22 2010 10:44 Heaven. wrote: North America is a bunch of complainer who rant over how underpowered Zerg is and Terran mech is imba I'm a Zerg player and I win many match ups fine, fair and dandy In Korea Terran is considered the weakest and Zerg is considered the strongest
Flat out lie. Don't post something you don't know anything about. the race split up (top 50) on the asia server is
19: T 16: P 13: Z 2: R
While I win a fair amount of ZvP I feel that I have to out play my Terran opponent heavily to win. You pretty much need to harass heavily with zerglings, open mutas to make them turtle more then take 3-4 bases to their 1-2 plus out playing heavily in major battles, scout all of their tech and defend their harass.
Furthermore when you have Pro players calling imba while other pros are refusing to use the terminology but still acknowledge that things need to be tweeked it's easy to see that something is astray. Sure eventually the meta will change and that will change the dynamic of the MU but their has to be a real strategy from Z to make the T change anything about their play (Harass is the only thing I can think of).
The thing that I would like to see is making one of Z's units 1 food again (like hydra was in sc:bw or roach was pre patch 13) but make sure it doesn't affect the ZvP MU too much (ZvZ is still growing quite a bit, but baneling play is annoying).
I get you, i really do because you honestly have to outplay them by using zerg's potential. Mech has limited play as its slow and clunky, it's depressing facing it but I KNOW that we have options to explore they are just harder to implement! Zerg is not underpowered it's just harder to play and to lesser skilled players it would seem otherwise because they will never reach that potential. Those who argue otherwise see what I see, what can be done if you eek out just a bit more here and there and voila you can beat mech and it goes downhill.
It's a plateau effect once you've beaten mech soundly you can emulate that same procedure in every game because Terrans feel comfortable playing the same playstyle.
Blizzard has to collect insurmountable amount of data to make a game feel balance on all levels, every month this game will be out meta games will change peoples thought patterns and skills will develop. The entire multiplayer will be a sentient being due to that and you need to understand that what seems obvious from your perspective is COMPLETELY different from another.
For example, I change my game up and manage to beat 10 meching terrans in a row because I can extort a weakness. However a fellow Zerg has just lost 10 games against the same meching terrans because he continues to follow the standard meta game for zerg. You will have 3 separate opinions that swear they are correct
1. Zerg can beat mech all the time 2. Mech is OP Zerg has no hope 3. Mech is fine I win about 50% of the time
You swiftly go to the nearest forum and complain with a reasonable explanation as to why its unbalanced/balanced with replays to prove it! YOU FEEL VERY STRONGLY ABOUT THIS BECAUSE OF YOUR PERSONAL EXPERIENCE
Hope this helps
That's true, what that is called is perceptions of reality. In all facets of life we have Perceptions and SC2 is no exception. While I agree with you completely on that end of it I also disagree by bringing up your previous points. You mentioned that the meta will act as a sentient being with an ebb and flow and if you put that information into a statistical analysis you will see a lot more zerg players (even high end) believe that ZvT needs to be tweeked.
To the guy that had his 200f army wiped by the 150f toss opp. the only thing I can really say is that you have room to grow, It has already been discussed that you should have teched to hive, you prolly could have scouted him better and a surround with zerglings (yes, they wreck colossi if you do a pincer attack) would have done wonders for your initial fight. ZvP is growing and changing, It will continue to evolve into something dynamic and fun; ZvT on the other hand needs some help, it may seem stagnant or boring because even doing the best tactics in the game you won't find an equal fight against an equal opponent.
On July 22 2010 13:30 StarBrift wrote: I think the reason zerg is considered kinda weak right now are the bloody maps. Some are just SO SMALL. I mean there is hardly any map in the pool that is actually as big as a normal sc1 map. Flanking is too hard on most maps and stalling the map in time to get expansions up etc almost never work. Terran and Protoss timing pushes become overpowered on some maps because of this. I hope they get rid of like 90% of the maps right away.
Been saying this since the first 2 weeks I got the beta (mid March). I think maps need to be bigger and more open, but Blizzard has clearly said they are not going to do that. And DO doesn't count, because the enemy literally can attack in a line to your base without you being able to flank and kill all your expansions.
I never said you can learn a new race in a day. I explicitly said I was talking about long-term whining. If you want to disagree with me, then fine, but try some reading comprehension classes before you attack me for things I'm not talking about.
I'm not going to respond to people who can't read or understand what I've written. I might be wrong or misinformed, and I'm willing to admit I'm wrong if I am, but please try to read what I've written before you male yourself look stupid. I'm not going to respond to stupid. (I'm sorry if you're a teenage progamer who thinks he's really smart. Seriously, try learning how to read and understand. It'll help you when you have to join the real world. What I'm saying is obnoxious and I'm sorry about that but it's also true.)
On July 22 2010 13:44 cucumber wrote: I never said you can learn a new race in a day. I explicitly said I was talking about long-term whining. If you want to disagree with me, then fine, but try some reading comprehension classes before you attack me for things I'm not talking about.
I'm not going to respond to people who can't read or understand what I've written. I might be wrong or misinformed, and I'm willing to admit I'm wrong if I am, but please try to read what I've written before you male yourself look stupid. I'm not going to respond to stupid. (I'm sorry if you're a teenage progamer who thinks he's really smart. Seriously, try learning how to read and understand. It'll help you when you have to join the real world. What I'm saying is obnoxious and I'm sorry about that but it's also true.)
First off why are you personally bashing individuals so much, your posts are more geared towards verbal abuse then getting your point across.
If people can't comprehend what your saying this is probably the fault of the conveyor, perhaps you should practice writing things out so they are more sensible.
Zerg's mobility is so freaking good. Could sneak shit in when you're not looking.
The points are fair and all, but:
-ZvZ is just... :\ all in zerglings or bane+lings -Though this will change eventually, ultimately the zerg army composition usually only consist of hydras for dps and roach for tank (and a bit of dps). That's it. Maybe some lings and mutas but that's the zerg fighting army in a nutshell. Hydroaches. Lings die very fast to AoE or upgraded units such as zealots and whatnot in like what, 2 shots? totally die against AoE stuff like siege tank splash damage (given with their center of AoE shit + "I REFUSE TO ACT STUPID AND SHOOT THE FIRST THING I SEE WITH OTHER TANKS UHUHUH" Mutas are good against toss I guess but the rest is like... well. Colossi melts shit, Immortals can tank a bit and obliterating roaches, stalkers help alot of with the roaches, zealots just tanks and slices things so nicely.
Don't even mention Terran Mech. At least this is what I think. -Difficult to get into a turtler?
though, I like playing zerg and I do see that zerg does require a different mindset and goals to win now then it is to play zerg in bw.
The biggest issue is that most zerg players sit on some variation of hydra/X. It's no one's fault but their own that they don't (ab)use broodlords, ultralisks, infestors, and/or nydus. All of the above are extremely good bordering on OP.
I really think that muta/baneling/zergling into adding infestors will become standard, hydra/roach is just not good enough. Thing is that it's pretty hard to micro muta/baneling/zergling/infestor compared to other standard builds, not surprised zergs aren't doing too well right now.
I don't think it needs to be rebalanced but I think it will be a while until Zerg is competitive against terran without resorting to all-ins.
Then again it was this way in BW too, management Zerg took like 8 years to develop.
It seems to me that Zerg is alot more challenging for lower level players. Scouting as zerg is insanely more important at lower level than for other races, since you need to make the right amount of army. Maybe that turns alot of people away from playing Z.
Also combatting a mech T requires excellent creep spreading and map control.
I don't know how balanced Z is at higher levels, they seem to do well in tournaments.
On July 22 2010 09:32 XBLancer wrote: I agree with almost all of your points, and I definitely agree with your overall point that people need so stop saying that Zerg are underpowered.
I honestly don't understand why people keep saying this...
I think it's a genuine belief of a lot Zerg players. You don't see a ton of threads discussing how terran or protoss are underpowered (anymore). Love how it's just instantly labeled as "whining" from people who don't even play the race.
Anyways...
I'm going to attempt to paint some broad strokes into this discussion.
I personally find the problem to be, what most people are suggesting is the solution. Zerg players MUST perform stupid little unexpected tricks and strategies to pull off the W. Soon these tricks and strategies will be expected and useless.
If we take a step back from the pro discussion and just look at the game in terms of the average playing populace, a Zerg player almost always HAS to be better than it's competition to win. That defeats the idea of evenly matched races. Therefor the race is underpowered when compared to Toss and Terran.
Nydus Networks - I like these, but they are becoming more and more expected and are so easy to counter. People have already gotten into the habit of building pylons/supply depots around the fog areas of their base. I will have to see nydus used well in a defensive position to believe that it's useful in that sense.
"Tech Switches" - Toss and Terran have so many diverse choices in units that these tech switches almost never play as a significant role as you're suggesting. I would rather suggest that the lack of diversity in units makes Zerg incredibly underpowered. That's what makes mech so strong.
Susceptibility to cheese - Although I would argue that all races have some susceptibility to cheese, Zerg MUST always be on their toes for it. I've played terrans who just refuse to scv scout because they can just wall in and scan later. Zerg, besides not having the ability to wall, have a ridiculous lack of anti-air and cloak detection pre-lair. Sure, people argue queens are an answer for air, but it's always a struggle. Especially for the common, non-pro, player.
Just use Roach burrow lolz - Yeh, it's useful. It's not going to be the game winning research. Especially against terran who can just scan. Once your opponent sees it, it's basically useless (except for the healing).
Scouting - just so much harder for zerg. Give us a cloaked overseer ability. Changelings get dropped so quickly now. Terrans have, once again, easy mode with scan.
Spawning larva and spreading creep are pretty self-explanatory. They're basically necessary. You have a lot of expansions and you need to protect them. Zerg units off creep are handicap. They can barely move.
Could nydus worms be set up between the zerg's bases, especially expos that are a good distance from the Zerg's main base? I think that could make some interesting play especially late game when some hard-to-reach expos are being picked off one by one by a terran's vikings or some other easily maneuverable harass units. I'm fairly confident some zergs have already tried this but I've never seen anyone try it. Maybe defensive nydus worm use isn't the most viable thing in the world.
On July 22 2010 14:46 Freeheals wrote: Could nydus worms be set up between the zerg's bases, especially expos that are a good distance from the Zerg's main base? I think that could make some interesting play especially late game when some hard-to-reach expos are being picked off one by one by a terran's vikings or some other easily maneuverable harass units. I'm fairly confident some zergs have already tried this but I've never seen anyone try it. Maybe defensive nydus worm use isn't the most viable thing in the world.
It's just really slow, I would have to see it to believe it. Once one guy pops out the opponent could just book it.
On July 22 2010 14:46 Freeheals wrote: Could nydus worms be set up between the zerg's bases, especially expos that are a good distance from the Zerg's main base? I think that could make some interesting play especially late game when some hard-to-reach expos are being picked off one by one by a terran's vikings or some other easily maneuverable harass units. I'm fairly confident some zergs have already tried this but I've never seen anyone try it. Maybe defensive nydus worm use isn't the most viable thing in the world.
Defensive nydus is really good it's just that it costs so damn much. In BW, a nydus cost 150/0, in sc2 they cost 100/200 for the network and then 100/100 for the worms. Late-game its nice but right now, it just seems too situational for such a high gas-cost.
I agree that Zerg isn't nearly as bad as people claim.
However, I really do feel Zerg is lacking something. Wether its a spell, unit, spellcaster ect. is beyond me. But they do not feel as finished as protoss or terran.
I do feel like removing the Lurker, Delfir, Muta Stacking, ect. and not replacing them for something interesting?
I mean, people say BANELINGS?!? Yes they are probably the only thing the Zerg got to spice up play, but lets be honest. They are not nearly as Micro intensive as Lurkers or Muta Stacking. You move the banelings into an army on ground or by overlords. Thats pretty much it.
On July 22 2010 14:46 Freeheals wrote: Could nydus worms be set up between the zerg's bases, especially expos that are a good distance from the Zerg's main base? I think that could make some interesting play especially late game when some hard-to-reach expos are being picked off one by one by a terran's vikings or some other easily maneuverable harass units. I'm fairly confident some zergs have already tried this but I've never seen anyone try it. Maybe defensive nydus worm use isn't the most viable thing in the world.
Defensive nydus is really good it's just that it costs so damn much. In BW, a nydus cost 150/0, in sc2 they cost 100/200 for the network and then 100/100 for the worms. Late-game its nice but right now, it just seems too situational for such a high gas-cost.
Nydus worms are really difficult to incorporate mid-game because every mineral, and more importantly, every vespene gas counts. Gas-wise, a functional Nydus network is the equivalent of 12 roaches (which is a really bad way to put things into perspective but still). The point is that they are huge investments in the early and mid game. However, they definitely should be used liberally in late game situations.
Could understand a lot better this whole argumentation that "zerg is weak" or so on if there was no zerg at any tournament or ever invited to tournaments. But seeing as among the pro's there is zerg players that are in tournaments and performing good. Cannot see how this should translate into zerg is weak. Just look at the King of the Beta Tournament by Day9
Idra-Z, Tester-P, IntoTheRainbow-T, Dimaga-Z, White-rA-P, TheLittleOne-R, Huk-P, and Qxc-T. (We are not seeing only terrans and Protoss players here)
At the moment they seem good to me at least, Zerg player myself. And personally I see/saw lot's of zerg players in second phase of beta as well. So saynig zerg is underpowered or weaker then the others seems just like a rant/cry for buff or justification for loss/bad play or whatever reason you may have for it. But even not at Pro levels there is Zerg players
Even if the numbers still point to that there is fewer Zerg players then other races, there is still som evidence that you apperently can win even if you play zerg
If this argumentation was true we wouldn't see any zerg at all if this was true. Why would anyone ever play the race that is absolute weaker then protoss/terran ? Does not make sense to me personally, and seemingly to some people in this thread as well.
Just cause we cannot mass roch/hydra every game vs any race on any map, does not make us weaker. And really, if you find that you lose with zerg or dislike them or want them buffed cause of X or Y reason and you don't want to work on your mistakes switch race if that makes you happier.
And most "issues" with Zerg that people mention just seems as something that comes with the race. If you don't like ex that some units are slow outside of creep or dislike spreading creep keeping larva up and mass expand and doing Zerg stuff in general mabey zerg aint for you But saying that Zerg is worse/weaker seems just truly not true at this point.
Could understand a lot better this whole argumentation that "zerg is weak" or so on if there was no zerg at any tournament or ever invited to tournaments. But seeing as among the pro's there is zerg players that are in tournaments and performing good. Cannot see how this should translate into zerg is weak. Just look at the King of the Beta Tournament by Day9
Idra-Z, Tester-P, IntoTheRainbow-T, Dimaga-Z, White-rA-P, TheLittleOne-R, Huk-P, and Qxc-T. (We are not seeing only terrans and Protoss players here)
At the moment they seem good to me at least, Zerg player myself. And personally I see/saw lot's of zerg players in second phase of beta as well. So saynig zerg is underpowered or weaker then the others seems just like a rant/cry for buff or justification for loss/bad play or whatever reason you may have for it. But even not at Pro levels there is Zerg players
Even if the numbers still point to that there is fewer Zerg players then other races, there is still som evidence that you apperently can win even if you play zerg
If this argumentation was true we wouldn't see any zerg at all if this was true. Why would anyone ever play the race that is absolute weaker then protoss/terran ? Does not make sense to me personally, and seemingly to some people in this thread as well.
Just cause we cannot mass roch/hydra every game vs any race on any map, does not make us weaker. And really, if you find that you lose with zerg or dislike them or want them buffed cause of X or Y reason and you don't want to work on your mistakes switch race if that makes you happier.
And most "issues" with Zerg that people mention just seems as something that comes with the race. If you don't like ex that some units are slow outside of creep or dislike spreading creep keeping larva up and mass expand and doing Zerg stuff in general mabey zerg aint for you But saying that Zerg is worse/weaker seems just truly not true at this point.
Sry for my bad english!
I don't see how pointing out that there are Zerg pro players translates to a statement on their strength as a race. I'm pretty sure no one is arguing that Zerg is "absolutely weaker" than toss or terran. It's just a common assertion that Zerg is not on the same even footing as the other two races in the grander image.
As for statistics, even though they suggest less people play Zerg, I just don't think statistics represent a fair statement on the state of any race. Each player is personally at a different skill level and have gone their own route in choosing what race they play.
Nydus was used quite alot in early beta. After the nerf in time for the worm to spawn though it sorta died down, it is still insanely effective though.
Nydus network/worms need a cost reduction. Or one network could let you build multiple exits at the same time, or just make the cooldown shorter by whatever is reasonable.
Right now, network + exits, especially if you intend to build multiple ones, is just way too costly to be used unless you are comfortably ahead / very safe.
I mean sure, it CAN be useful, but right now given the cost/time investment, and the risk factor, it's 95% of the time nothing more than a "cute" play.
Keep in mind units come out one at a time, which is another crippling factor: Using it defensively is really not an option unless you see your opponent coming a mile away so your units have time to pop out before the engagement. Using it offensively will fail horrendously if your opponent manages to get his blob of units close enough to the just-finishing worm and kills units one by one as they come out.
Half of the people complaining about the Zerg complaining have no clue about playing Zerg anyway, it's painfully obvious.
"OMG USE NYDUS LOL" yeah ok we'll get right back to you on that bro. You may or may not have noticed that any competitive player worth his salt now covers the outskirts of his base with pylons/depots/what have you. Yeah, GL with that nydus.
I think the big downer or nydus is that you cant retract the worm and get back the money. Seems really unfair when you think that Terran can disband the freaking bunkers for no loss at all.
On July 22 2010 14:04 Barrin wrote: wow cucumber. do you have any idea what a competitive game is supposed to be? If zerg is not balanced, there is a problem, regardless of what you seem to think the casuals want to do.
Yes, I do. If zerg is not balanced I completely agree it should be fixed. All I am saying is that progamers shouldn't pick an underpowered race and then want props for choosing it. If zerg is underpowered or needs more diversity, I hope Blizzard fixes it (I don't pretend to know). The only thing I am saying is that competitive gamers don't get to whine that that they picked zerg and lost because zerg was underpowered. The game is in beta and anyone can switch races. Zerg may be underpowered or lack diversity; I don't really have an opinion.
I'm bowing out of this thread before I get a warning/banning. I'm really not saying anything I think should be controversial or hard to understand. If you're a gamer for fun then by all means if you think zerg is underpowered/lacks diversity please tell Blizzard. If you're a pro, then choose zerg if you don't think that. If you do think that and you're a pro, then don't whine. You chose it.
I really don't think my opinion should be controversial. If you're a pro then only choose zerg if you think you can win. If no pros choose zerg, Blizzard will notice. If you play for fun and want to play zerg, by all means complain if zerg is underpowered.
If you're a pro don't play zerg unless you aren't going to whine that it's underpowered. ie, if you are paid to win then choose the race that can effect that.
Anyway, I am bowing out of this thread. I don't want to offend anyone else or get into fights. It's just a game and I hope you all enjoy playing once it comes out! (just a week from now!!)
On July 22 2010 15:08 Buffy wrote: Could understand a lot better this whole argumentation that "zerg is weak" or so on if there was no zerg at any tournament or ever invited to tournaments. But seeing as among the pro's there is zerg players that are in tournaments and performing good. Cannot see how this should translate into zerg is weak. Just look at the King of the Beta Tournament by Day9
Idra-Z, Tester-P, IntoTheRainbow-T, Dimaga-Z, White-rA-P, TheLittleOne-R, Huk-P, and Qxc-T. (We are not seeing only terrans and Protoss players here)
At the moment they seem good to me at least, Zerg player myself. And personally I see/saw lot's of zerg players in second phase of beta as well. So saynig zerg is underpowered or weaker then the others seems just like a rant/cry for buff or justification for loss/bad play or whatever reason you may have for it. But even not at Pro levels there is Zerg players
You understand that Day[9]'s tournament is an invitational, right? Meaning he likely hand-picked the players you see before you, and meaning he probably considered balancing out the race distribution as much as possible.
On July 22 2010 15:08 Buffy wrote: Could understand a lot better this whole argumentation that "zerg is weak" or so on if there was no zerg at any tournament or ever invited to tournaments. But seeing as among the pro's there is zerg players that are in tournaments and performing good. Cannot see how this should translate into zerg is weak. Just look at the King of the Beta Tournament by Day9
Idra-Z, Tester-P, IntoTheRainbow-T, Dimaga-Z, White-rA-P, TheLittleOne-R, Huk-P, and Qxc-T. (We are not seeing only terrans and Protoss players here)
At the moment they seem good to me at least, Zerg player myself. And personally I see/saw lot's of zerg players in second phase of beta as well. So saynig zerg is underpowered or weaker then the others seems just like a rant/cry for buff or justification for loss/bad play or whatever reason you may have for it. But even not at Pro levels there is Zerg players
You understand that Day[9]'s tournament is an invitational, right? Meaning he likely hand-picked the players you see before you, and meaning he probably considered balancing out the race distribution as much as possible.
Yes absolutely I know it was invite only, but not sure how he picked, but I was under the assumption he was picking by skill and by how good you have performed. So I thought he picked by that and not by race. And if I was right about him picking the players by skills / performance I suspected if Zerg was "underpowered" or what to really say, there would've been 1 or 0 zerg players.
On July 22 2010 15:08 Buffy wrote: Could understand a lot better this whole argumentation that "zerg is weak" or so on if there was no zerg at any tournament or ever invited to tournaments. But seeing as among the pro's there is zerg players that are in tournaments and performing good. Cannot see how this should translate into zerg is weak. Just look at the King of the Beta Tournament by Day9
Idra-Z, Tester-P, IntoTheRainbow-T, Dimaga-Z, White-rA-P, TheLittleOne-R, Huk-P, and Qxc-T. (We are not seeing only terrans and Protoss players here)
At the moment they seem good to me at least, Zerg player myself. And personally I see/saw lot's of zerg players in second phase of beta as well. So saynig zerg is underpowered or weaker then the others seems just like a rant/cry for buff or justification for loss/bad play or whatever reason you may have for it. But even not at Pro levels there is Zerg players
You understand that Day[9]'s tournament is an invitational, right? Meaning he likely hand-picked the players you see before you, and meaning he probably considered balancing out the race distribution as much as possible.
Yes absolutely I know it was invite only, but not sure how he picked, but I was under the assumption he was picking by skill and by how good you have performed. So I thought he picked by that and not by race. And if I was right about him picking the players by skills / performance I suspected if Zerg was "underpowered" or what to really say, there would've been 1 or 0 zerg players.
Once again sry for bad english
Of course skill is gonna be the main factor but it's not like these people are hands down the best 8 people in the world. Day invited people who are top players and I'm sure considered the races when doing so. Say the 8 best players players in the world were all terran, it would still be silly to choose 8 terrans.
On July 22 2010 15:08 Buffy wrote: Could understand a lot better this whole argumentation that "zerg is weak" or so on if there was no zerg at any tournament or ever invited to tournaments. But seeing as among the pro's there is zerg players that are in tournaments and performing good. Cannot see how this should translate into zerg is weak. Just look at the King of the Beta Tournament by Day9
Idra-Z, Tester-P, IntoTheRainbow-T, Dimaga-Z, White-rA-P, TheLittleOne-R, Huk-P, and Qxc-T. (We are not seeing only terrans and Protoss players here)
At the moment they seem good to me at least, Zerg player myself. And personally I see/saw lot's of zerg players in second phase of beta as well. So saynig zerg is underpowered or weaker then the others seems just like a rant/cry for buff or justification for loss/bad play or whatever reason you may have for it. But even not at Pro levels there is Zerg players
You understand that Day[9]'s tournament is an invitational, right? Meaning he likely hand-picked the players you see before you, and meaning he probably considered balancing out the race distribution as much as possible.
Yes absolutely I know it was invite only, but not sure how he picked, but I was under the assumption he was picking by skill and by how good you have performed. So I thought he picked by that and not by race. And if I was right about him picking the players by skills / performance I suspected if Zerg was "underpowered" or what to really say, there would've been 1 or 0 zerg players.
Once again sry for bad english
Of course skill is gonna be the main factor but it's not like these people are hands down the best 8 people in the world. Day invited people who are top players and I'm sure considered the races when doing so. Say the 8 best players players in the world were all terran, it would still be silly to choose 8 terrans.
Yeah, didn't think of the entertainment factor of the whole thing, silly of me : /
Just because the OP can point out the inherent advantages of the zerg race (advantages that have been there throughout the entirety of SC2), does not mean that those aspects of the race trump the counter-advantages (or rather, unique aspects and elements) of the other races. Yes, there are things about the Zerg that the other races do not have that give them an upper hand in some situations. Every race has these, but Zerg players are not complaining about the race being absolutely underpowered. Everyone who actually plays SC2 at a diamond+ level understands that SC2 is a relatively balanced game. The imba is slight, but it is still there. You prove nothing in your post.
Larva Injection (yes pros still mess this up) Transfusion strategies Contamination Nydus Networks both offensively and defensively
Yes, these things should be put to more use- just like how Warp Prism drops should be used more, or the many other things that Terran and Protoss players have at their disposal that are underused should be used more. At the same time, that's much easier said than done. Do people seriously think that the people who have chosen to play Zerg in SC2 thus far just happen to be the people who are less skilled than the ones that have chosen to play T and P? Does the absolutely disproportionate ratio of P-T-Z players in tournaments (and especially the winners of those tournaments) just lend itself to the idea that Zerg PLAYERS, not the race, are weak? If the numbers and the evidence were not so disproportionate, then I might agree that people are just QQing, and that it's just a difficult race to play correctly. However, a reasonable person who has watched many replays and has experienced many games would not think this to be the case.
In my opinion, Zerg is balanced enough for bliz to release the game and for people to enjoy playing the race competitively. That does not mean the race is balanced. It is weaker than the other races, and it needs changes- but these changes do not need to be extraordinary, but they do need to be made.
It would be pretentious of me to try to say exactly what is wrong with Zerg, just as it is pretentious of anyone to think that they have a solution to fix the race. It is definitely a complicated issue, but people do need to realize that changes are necessary in order for SC2 to be as good of a game as it possibly can be- and so that we can see an even distribution of Pro players throughout the various races in the game.
I think this thread should be more focused on the ZvT MU. ZvP is actually pretty fun and balanced, the only unit that I see and cringe at is the colossus and that can be dealt with by multiple angles of attack. ZvZ is a little degenerate but it isn't any worse than sc:bw ZvZ so I don't think I would make changes with that being the focus either. Really all I see that should be the focus is ZvT.
Because we aren't bringing in the P or T macro equivalent of the queen that could be "taken out" but it does do damage and cost food so I left it in. As you can see the list for zerg is a little more condensed with 2 of the units being morphs and the shift between the 3 races is different.
The bulk of your army can be taken down to these X units before T3 tech (I say bulk because the units not on this list are situational) you have
Zergling Zealot Marine Hydra Sentry Maurader Roach Stalker Siege tank Immortal Hellion Void Ray Banshee* Viking*
Banelings, Mutas, Corruptors, Phoenix, Infestors, Warp prisms, Overseers, Reaper, Ghost, DT, HT are all specific tech that you go for while these units see high amounts of play. The 2 units with asterisks next to them are the viking (heavy play in TvP) and Banshee (would see heavy play if there weren't better options at tech level). You see Immortals quite often (only time you don't is when they are going for colossus timing atk) and players like white-ra use void rays every PvT. While on the zerg end you have the zergling which is great, it dies to plenty but does its job; Hydras see play in most zerg games at one point or another (Best unit to bolster around) and Roach is good against a lot of things but it gets outclassed quickly, especially since it isn't on par with units like marauders and stalkers (Which is arguably the bulk of the other races {bio not mech}). This is where the problem lies and their are quite a few ways to fix it. One is to make Roachs 1f again (Helps early by using less ovies and later by effectively doubling your Roach count) another is to make the lurker again or some other unit that does opens up strats (convienently adding another unit would make Z less stale and boring {I personally don't have a problem with it being stale or w/e}). These are merely a suggestion, I don't pretend to be a game designer or really anyone except an avid player and fan.
Ultras and B-lords are good units that will see their play once the meta evolves and the strats for them emerge. Thor and B-C are good units (Thor is great) that will/have see(n) play. Colossus is an awesome unit and carriers is meh (I didn't care for it in BW either).
tl:dr- I love Zerg but I think it needs something to bolster the ZvT gameplay. I think there are a lot of unseen strats out there and a diverse meta waiting to be shaped but it may need nurturing.
Hm lots of the people in here havent extensively played zerg have they?
On July 22 2010 07:11 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: Zerg has many mechanics that still have not been used to their fullest:
Larva Injection (yes pros still mess this up)
Transfusion strategies
Contamination
Nydus Networks both offensively and defensively
Missing a couple of larva injections in the mid game is hardly game breaking... Stop repeating this useless idea of how it messes everything up.
Transfusion is quite nice, but can only really be decently used for defensive purposes, and that only early game. Any later than that, noone can transfuse in time due to the massive armies and the rate of damage dealing. And of course doesnt even come close to medevacs...
Contamination is decent, I'm using it myself when I get the chance. Ends up being kind of costly tho, still, a nice harrassment technique
Nydus SUCK. Thats it. Researching your overlord upgrades is MUCH MUCH more cost efficient. Nydus can be clubbed to death by a few damn workers for crying out loud.
Mobility -> as was pointed out, stop listening to day9...
On July 22 2010 10:19 waffling1 wrote: it would seem that the spine crawler can pretty much be used as a medium seige tank.
Medium siege tank? WTF? Range of 7 and damage of 25 +5 vs armored, how does this even come close to 13 and 50+?? Spines are an amazing defensive structure, but come on...
On July 22 2010 10:19 waffling1 wrote: also, baneling drops to the econ line. comon.
Currently one of the most inefficient way to kill workers, as I am sure you would know if you played zerg and tried it out.
On July 22 2010 10:13 ckw wrote: Oh yeah and as stated above, the creep tumors could be called IMBA, they give speed/health bonuses
Err, health bonuses? Mustve missed this in the patch notes I guess...
Anyhow, I like zerg quite a lot, and I do believe the problem is mostly the mappool. Seriously, ALL MAPS promote offensive play by terran/protoss and leave zerg with very few ways to defend.
Make maps with at least 2 open ramps to each base area, get rid of all those ledges so freely abused by those units with huge range and awe-inspiring damage and the game will look a lot more different... To be frank, just the 2 open wide ramps will be enough...
PS STOP REPEATING ULTRAS ROCK AND ITS JUST THAT WE ARE NAAABS AND CANT USE THEM!!! Ultras PALE in front of any other tier 3 units and take the longest to tech to
I couldnt dissagree more with this thread. Its very clear that zerg needs some help in the current state of the game. And this wont change 1-2 years after release.. It will take alot of time until ppl get really good at sc2 it wont happen over night. If in 3-4 years zerg will be too strong they can be nerfed again but i dont think there is sooo crazy much more potential in zerg compared to the other races..
what I find underpowred with Z is the fact you suck off creep with roaches or hydras, and larva injection is way less good than mules and chrono because of one thing: you cannot cast two at once...so if you dont have Flawless macro, you will suffer, whereas protoss and terran will not suffer nearly as badly. just drop two mules, chrono whatever u want whenever u want instead....
This is queite clear to me atleast, duno how it can escape so many other people..
On July 22 2010 19:24 arnold(soTa) wrote: what I find underpowred with Z is the fact you suck off creep with roaches or hydras, and larva injection is way less good than mules and chrono because of one thing: you cannot cast two at once...so if you dont have Flawless macro, you will suffer, whereas protoss and terran will not suffer nearly as badly. just drop two mules, chrono whatever u want whenever u want instead....
This is queite clear to me atleast, duno how it can escape so many other people..
Well even the best players forget about chrono in the late game. And some don't even think it's that important. So i guess it's not that good.
While inject larva is pretty much all zerg has. No inject no party. I call that good, specially when "droneing up".
So, in short: Larva injection is way better than you think, if you use it correctly of course.
Actually lowering nydus cost seems like a good change to the zerg. It really needs to be utilized more often than a unique tactic that's only viable once every 10 games and depends on your opponent leaving one of his expos entirely undefended.
On July 22 2010 19:24 arnold(soTa) wrote: what I find underpowred with Z is the fact you suck off creep with roaches or hydras, and larva injection is way less good than mules and chrono because of one thing: you cannot cast two at once...so if you dont have Flawless macro, you will suffer, whereas protoss and terran will not suffer nearly as badly. just drop two mules, chrono whatever u want whenever u want instead....
This is queite clear to me atleast, duno how it can escape so many other people..
Well even the best players forget about chrono in the late game. And some don't even think it's that important. So i guess it's not that good.
While inject larva is pretty much all zerg has. No inject no party. I call that good, specially when "droneing up".
So, in short: Larva injection is way better than you think, if you use it correctly of course.
Larva injections are great and they help zerg a lot but they aren't much of a choice. If a zerg forgets his larva injections then he gets out about 1/3 of the potential larvas and has his production capacity sliced by 2/3.
why people feel like zerg is underpowered is due to the fact if you don't play one base and instead fast expand early, you put yourself in a position where you wont be able to put any pressure on your opponent and only can react to what he does until like 10 minutes in the game. thus scouting becomes crucial, if you miss any tech switches hidden techs or anything your opponent does your gonna be catched offguard pretty easy.
all this makes you feal powerless playing zerg. but in my opinion this ain't a problem. there are enough good zergs that have shown that there are ways to deal with it.
some tweaking will always be needed but imo Blizz did a pretty good job so far
It's funny to see this thread because actually Zerg started the Beta far stronger...over time they got butchered and now we are seeing in tourney's that Protoss and Terran are the main contenders...where in the past Zerg was somewhat dominant...
Blizzard didn't show Zerg as much love, creativity and attention as they did to Protoss and Terran and we are seeing how woefully inadequate Zerg is now due to this neglect...
It's a sad state of affairs that such an iconic race has been created with such rock, paper, scissor concept driven design that each unit for Zerg has been made into a inflexible mess...
The main issue is Blizzard made less units for Zerg but never once did they think to make the race more flexible in order to counter the less units...also why have Zerg got the most lengthy and protracted tech tree? I mean seriously what is up with that bureaucratic mess of a tech tree?
Zerg is good?
Definately not the case...Blizzard need to bring some much needed love and attention back to Zerg...because at the minute it well and truly is the odd race...
The sad thing is, if nothing changes after release, people will realize just how amazingly fragile zerg is in the first minutes of the game... I always keep on praying the enemy doesnt send a troop of 8 marines whilst I am just getting my expo up and running. the bases are so open, its really annoying. We all have seen how easy it is to harrass a zerg in the early game and massive halt any expansion. And a zerg with no expo tends to get punished in the long run...
ADD MORE OPEN MAPS!!! I read some people complain about how the maps is really what is limiting the zerg, and the more I think about it, the more it makes sense. No way to get any surrounds in the current maps, heck, there is no way to get to the enemy half of the time. I dont care that its just 2 upgrades to "unlimited dropships", it costs 300/300 and at least 120 secs AFTER LAIR to get there...
Also, no other race has to make the decisions zerg has to, it is oh so easy to block those ramps and mass up units in a relaxed fashion. Make the other races have to sometimes face the same decisions and situations zerg has to, and I am SO sure all those gay sieges on inreachable cliffs will miraculously go away, as everyone will be holding on to their dear bases. Just as zerg are
I say Blizzard should give Zerg a new defensive structure called "Zerg Meat Shield" ZMS.
It's basically a massive ramp blocker with a cat flap that allows the free movement of zerg units but no entry to opponents...it should have maybe 500 hp and can be erected once a spawning pool is down.
On July 22 2010 19:38 Sadistx wrote: Actually lowering nydus cost seems like a good change to the zerg. It really needs to be utilized more often than a unique tactic that's only viable once every 10 games and depends on your opponent leaving one of his expos entirely undefended.
It took me about until after the second ladder reset to hit plat/diamond with zerg. I started playing random for fun after that and I hit diamond as random within 50 games. I find pretty much every matchup easier than zvp zvt. The game might still be balanced but I just found zerg a pain to learn and it's so hard adjusting to all the new build orders that come out and adjusting to the patches.
I dont think Zerg is really bad or anything. But what I do dislike about the Zerg are their spells. Not the spells itself, but the clear difference between a spell-caster and a damage dealer.
Terran: bio has stimpack, tanks have siege, Thors 250mm cannons and of course there is the yamato cannon for the BC's. to top this all up they have the Ghosts, which is an all around spell-caster.
Toss: They have blink for stalkers, Sentry's are spell-caster which you get pretty much always, without having to go down some big tech three. Phoenixes have graviton beams, lets not begin about the dark Templar and High Templar.and the mothership having the mass recall and Vortex.
These are all very nice command spells for both damage dealers and spell-casters The Zerg really lag's this. damage dealers have burrow, and some move while burrow, and then there are the spell-caster, which are totally awesome. But the damage dealers have no command spells, and I really miss this when I play Zerg. It feels much more as 1a2a3a then with the other races.
So if they should change anything I hope Roaches Mutalisks and Hydralisks will get there own nice spells to cast during a battle
On July 22 2010 19:24 arnold(soTa) wrote: what I find underpowred with Z is the fact you suck off creep with roaches or hydras, and larva injection is way less good than mules and chrono because of one thing: you cannot cast two at once...so if you dont have Flawless macro, you will suffer, whereas protoss and terran will not suffer nearly as badly. just drop two mules, chrono whatever u want whenever u want instead....
This is queite clear to me atleast, duno how it can escape so many other people..
Well even the best players forget about chrono in the late game. And some don't even think it's that important. So i guess it's not that good.
While inject larva is pretty much all zerg has. No inject no party. I call that good, specially when "droneing up".
So, in short: Larva injection is way better than you think, if you use it correctly of course.
you missed my point entirely, you need flawless injections (meaning you inject larvae the instant your larvae spawns) to contend with terran/protoss unit production. and that is close to impossible.. missing mules and chronos does NOT hurt in teh same way BECAUSE YOU CAN CAST MULTIPLE AT ONCE.
On July 22 2010 19:38 Sadistx wrote: Actually lowering nydus cost seems like a good change to the zerg. It really needs to be utilized more often than a unique tactic that's only viable once every 10 games and depends on your opponent leaving one of his expos entirely undefended.
I would like to see the cost lowered, and something about creep/non creep nydus change
Like, lower the cost but if it's built off creep the build time is longer, if it's built on creep it's regular speed. It would make a better defensive structure while not making it bad offensively since it would be cheaper and so less of an investment if it all goes to shit.
For the record I nydus in almost all my z games since no one does it anymore. Sometimes you can even nydus right in view of peoples bases (in top diamond) and they don't pay any attention.
On July 22 2010 21:20 Merikh wrote: Just to throw this out there. People say zerg is boring, then stop 1 base all in muta/ling every fucking game!
I swear that's like the only strategy I've seen on the US servers phase 2. I've yet to see some creative stuff on ladder.
I find Zerg boring and I try to grab as many expo's as possible...
Blizzard should have left Roach's with their anti-air, Queens with their ability to burrow from hatch to hatch...Lurkers should never have been taken away.
On July 22 2010 07:11 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: Okay so I can't count how many QQ threads I've seen on Zerg being underpowered how it's uncreative it needs changes blah blah blah. Well I play zerg and I'm constantly around some of the best zergs around and generally I tend to disagree and I'm about to explain why.
Tech Switches
Unlike other races where you need to build a whole new production facility to make a new set of units such as a factory a stargate, the zerg only needs to wait on a single tech building and then every single hatch/lair/hive can produce that unit. This makes Zerg the undeniable king of Tech Switching, yes the tech buildings can take quite a while to build but this is to balance out the fact that as soon as it's done there can be 20+ of that unit hatching at any given time.
This kind of rapid unit composition switching is unparalleled by the other races especially terran who has to deal with addons and switching them around if they want to change their unit composition even while dealing with the same units.
Mobility
The zerg air army can be very frightening when used correctly, creep giving movement boosts when exploited allows for aggressive creep expansion letting the zerg dominate the map early on in the game. Later in the game Nydus networks allow a zerg to move their army from one corner of the map to the other in the blink of an eye. Fungal Growth used effectively can stop the mobility of their opponents completely. Zerg is capable of out maneuvering every other race in the game with the exeption of the use of mass recall by protoss but that has limited uses when compared to a good nydus network setup.
Unit Production
Zerg has the capability to reproduce units faster than any other race with the queen mechanics, larva spit is so completely powerful and watching the top zergs at the moment you will see that even they don't miss larva injections. The zerg macro mechanic is tough to deal with as you have to manage every hatchery seperately requiring a lot more multitasking than warpins or dealing with add-ons. But when done effectively the rate at which a zerg can produce units is rather scary.
Conclusion
Zerg has many mechanics that still have not been used to their fullest:
Larva Injection (yes pros still mess this up)
Transfusion strategies
Contamination
Nydus Networks both offensively and defensively
So until this game is released and players get the time to REALLY get their hands on zerg and play with it and experiment then I don't think it's right to really be commenting on how zerg is broken it doesn't work yada yada. Previously people complained that Ultras werent usable and that they were the reason why zerg didn't have any units and now Ultras are being used in top level play somewhat. There might be a few more adjustments to zerg units down the road but for now saying "Zerg sucks fix it now" is a bit of an exaggeration.
Tech Switching: The flip side of that coin is it's impossible to disguise what you're doing. If the opponent sees a Spire, they expect to see Mutas soon after. Even worse, due to creep mechanics, you can't even hide the tech building away from your base (overlord spreading creep elsewhere means that a building can be killed with a single viking...)
Mobility: Sure, burrowed Roaches and Nydus Networks can greatly increase one's mobility, but they're still tactical gimmicks. Suggesting that Zerg should use those tactics to win their games is as ridiculous as me suggesting that Terran should win with Reapers and Banshees...or Protoss should always win with Dark Templar and Pheonixes. Zerg is the only race that can't dictate the game's pace (they're extremely reactionary) and can't win in straight-up battles even with a huge macro advantage.
As for your final points...
SL - the difference between pro SL timing and perfect SL timing is irrelivant. Gas is always the cap on what Zerg can make, not larvae.
Transfusion Strategies - WTF? The only application that could ever work would involve mass creep spreading...and once again, simply abusing a gimmick. Far more can go wrong with offesnsive Queens than can go right.
Contamination - The reason you see Contamination done so little is that if Zerg attempted to do it in mass the opponent would work to prevent it with AA. If Zerg throws down one contamination, alarms don't go off to make mass AA. If Zerg continued using the ability every minute of the game, turrents woudl go up, etc...worth adding, overseers aren't cheep and losing one is a big hit in both cost and supply.
Conclusion:
The gap between the three races will only get wider with time unless Blizzard intervenes. A good Terran player who is willing to adapt and scout often should NEVER lose to an equal skilled Zerg player.
I played random in phase 1 and settled on Zerg in phase 2. I'm still pretty bad, but I'm still enjoying myself because I feel there's a lot more to occupy my time and keep me interested with Zerg than the other two races. Most people experience this same thing and say that Zerg requires too much management. I think anyone who thinks anything in Starcraft 2 requires too much management has never played Starcraft 1. heh.
The only changes I'd really suggest are moving Hydras to tier 1, lowering their damage a bit and then moving Roaches to T2, make them larger (edit: like a little smaller physically than siege tanks), and buff their damage. While this, of course, would mean big changes for how people approach a vZ match and also fundamentally change how Zerg is currently played, I think in the long run it would work out pretty well. I could write a whole thread on all the positive changes I think it would mean for zerg, but I'll leave it there for now.
On July 22 2010 22:34 DedOnArrival wrote: I played random in phase 1 and settled on Zerg in phase 2. I'm still pretty bad, but I'm still enjoying myself because I feel there's a lot more to occupy my time and keep me interested with Zerg than the other two races. Most people experience this same thing and say that Zerg requires too much management. I think anyone who thinks anything in Starcraft 2 requires too much management has never played Starcraft 1. heh.
The only changes I'd really suggest are moving Hydras to tier 1, lowering their damage a bit and then moving Roaches to T2, make them larger (edit: like a little smaller physically than siege tanks), and buff their damage. While this, of course, would mean big changes for how people approach a vZ match and also fundamentally change how Zerg is currently played, I think in the long run it would work out pretty well. I could write a whole thread on all the positive changes I think it would mean for zerg, but I'll leave it there for now.
I agreed with this change a long time ago, but the caveat needs to be another AA unit. If Hydra damage is reduced (and turns into a slightly buffed Marine like in SC1), Zerg has no AA for things like VR's in the early-midgame.
I feel like the Corrupter is a very flawed unit...it's a worthless caster and only AA to Capital Ships...a role somewhat fulfilled by IP on an Infestor.
My guess is that the first exapantion is going to definetely add a T2 non-AA unit to Zerg, fulfilling the role that the Roach would have if it were T2 now.
On July 22 2010 22:29 Graven wrote: Tech Switching: The flip side of that coin is it's impossible to disguise what you're doing. If the opponent sees a Spire, they expect to see Mutas soon after. Even worse, due to creep mechanics, you can't even hide the tech building away from your base (overlord spreading creep elsewhere means that a building can be killed with a single viking...)
I wish people wouldn't use words like impossible and so forth. By the time you are at lair you should be underway with creep tumors and it is more than than feasible to at least put your spire/hydra/etc at least a little bit away from your hatchery.
Same with creeping overlord. I wouldn't bet on putting it very far away, but you can certainly use it to place tech in the outskirts of your base.
Also, techswitching does not need to be a ninja move. When you are into the midgame with like 150 supply and a steady economy you can pretty much afford any tech building you want. So what if the opponent sees that you have the buildings? He still dont know what you are going to use your next 20 larva on.
Biggest argument against tech switch is that there reallly isnt any tech switch in the world that can outmanouver Mech.
On July 22 2010 22:29 Graven wrote: Tech Switching: The flip side of that coin is it's impossible to disguise what you're doing. If the opponent sees a Spire, they expect to see Mutas soon after. Even worse, due to creep mechanics, you can't even hide the tech building away from your base (overlord spreading creep elsewhere means that a building can be killed with a single viking...)
I wish people wouldn't use words like impossible and so forth. By the time you are at lair you should be underway with creep tumors and it is more than than feasible to at least put your spire/hydra/etc at least a little bit away from your hatchery.
Same with creeping overlord. I wouldn't bet on putting it very far away, but you can certainly use it to place tech in the outskirts of your base.
Also, techswitching does not need to be a ninja move. When you are into the midgame with like 150 supply and a steady economy you can pretty much afford any tech building you want. So what if the opponent sees that you have the buildings? He still dont know what you are going to use your next 20 larva on.
Biggest argument against tech switch is that there reallly isnt any tech switch in the world that can outmanouver Mech.
You make it sound like "tech switching" is easy and cost-effective for Zerg. If a Zerg player goes Lair and fast Spire and the Spire is scouted, it's a HUGE disadvantage. Not only did you have to waste 17 minutes building the Spire, but the 5-6 Mutas you make immediately after NEED to do a ton of damage to make it worth while. A Scan+Turret means the Zerg player is playing behind the rest of the game.
As for a "tech switch" that can beat Mech, Zerg can go mass Roach/Brolord and be very effective against Mech, but again, the problem is the Terran versatility. As soon as the Terran scouts the Greater Spire, they can have a dozen Vikings waiting for the attack.
The disadvantage for Zerg is inherent in design, not conclusive to against mech. Zerg are in a position where they must both react to what the opponent is doing AND out-macro/out-mass the appropriate response. Zerg has no real "hard" counters, whereas Terran have nearly an entire race of hard counters, making it possible for them to counter the counter with exponentially greater effiency and speed than Zerg.
On July 22 2010 22:18 arnold(soTa) wrote: you missed my point entirely, you need flawless injections (meaning you inject larvae the instant your larvae spawns) to contend with terran/protoss unit production. and that is close to impossible.. missing mules and chronos does NOT hurt in teh same way BECAUSE YOU CAN CAST MULTIPLE AT ONCE.
This should be queite clear..
Yes, but P/T must flawlessly queue every unit before the previous one finishes (or use warpgate cooldown immediately) to avoid wasting production time. Queen injection is the only thing that makes our macro equal to theirs, otherwise it would just be 5szzzzzzzzzz all the time. We can choose to PRODUCE units FROM LARVA at any time, and larva will continue to spawn with no loss of production (up to the cap of 3). Adding the Queen makes Zerg have to actually look at our bases once in a while.
What I think would help Zerg the most would be more large maps with wide open areas. You really don't get to utilize most of zerg's strengths on the 2 player maps, where you see players like Dimaga just do baneling busts and allins - probably cos he feels it's the most viable playstyle for those maps.
Nydus worms and drops etc. aren't that underutilized but there just isn't a big chance to get to use them on certain maps and occasions safely. Usually you want 3+ bases before Nydus starts feeling worth the gas investment, which you'd otherwise have to spend on units and upgrades.
For example ZvT on small maps seems hellish since the terran can just turtle on 2 bases with turrets covering every angle of his base until he's ready to push out with an unstoppable mech force. It makes the whole "abuse the terran immobility" quote a bit void on these maps: there's not a lot of immobility to abuse since the distances are so short and the maps so one dimensional.
Maps like Meta and LT actually make playing zerg feel a lot more diverse and you just generally feel like you have a lot more options at your disposal. I wouldn't mind seeing a few even larger maps with more wide open areas to get to see more multitasking, flanking and real macro battles.
Other points in the OP
Transfusion strategies: Transfusion is awesome but like frenzy, it reaches its full potential with T3 units (ultras, broodlords) that get the most out of the heals. The problem is surviving up to this point on smaller maps, where guerilla tactics lose some of their viability.
Contamination: Using one overseer for scouting and delaying tech or unit production is cool but mass producing them seems way too gas heavy even on bigger maps. I've had most success with it delaying colossi production with the first overseer and later dropping in his base killing the tech. It's definately something to use, but on a small scale.
Conclusion
The points in the OP are definately good, but I feel like they're something that can refine zerg play rather than address the real underlying issues zergs have been having. The biggest issue I see with zerg is these small maps that pigeonhole zerg into a certain style of play which isn't really entertaining to watch nor fun to play.
On July 22 2010 07:11 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: Okay so I can't count how many QQ threads I've seen on Zerg being underpowered how it's uncreative it needs changes blah blah blah. Well I play zerg and I'm constantly around some of the best zergs around and generally I tend to disagree and I'm about to explain why.
Unlike other races where you need to build a whole new production facility to make a new set of units such as a factory a stargate, the zerg only needs to wait on a single tech building and then every single hatch/lair/hive can produce that unit. This makes Zerg the undeniable king of Tech Switching, yes the tech buildings can take quite a while to build but this is to balance out the fact that as soon as it's done there can be 20+ of that unit hatching at any given time.
This kind of rapid unit composition switching is unparalleled by the other races especially terran who has to deal with addons and switching them around if they want to change their unit composition even while dealing with the same units.
The zerg air army can be very frightening when used correctly, creep giving movement boosts when exploited allows for aggressive creep expansion letting the zerg dominate the map early on in the game. Later in the game Nydus networks allow a zerg to move their army from one corner of the map to the other in the blink of an eye. Fungal Growth used effectively can stop the mobility of their opponents completely. Zerg is capable of out maneuvering every other race in the game with the exeption of the use of mass recall by protoss but that has limited uses when compared to a good nydus network setup.
Zerg has the capability to reproduce units faster than any other race with the queen mechanics, larva spit is so completely powerful and watching the top zergs at the moment you will see that even they don't miss larva injections. The zerg macro mechanic is tough to deal with as you have to manage every hatchery seperately requiring a lot more multitasking than warpins or dealing with add-ons. But when done effectively the rate at which a zerg can produce units is rather scary.
Zerg has many mechanics that still have not been used to their fullest:
Larva Injection (yes pros still mess this up)
Transfusion strategies
Contamination
Nydus Networks both offensively and defensively
So until this game is released and players get the time to REALLY get their hands on zerg and play with it and experiment then I don't think it's right to really be commenting on how zerg is broken it doesn't work yada yada. Previously people complained that Ultras werent usable and that they were the reason why zerg didn't have any units and now Ultras are being used in top level play somewhat. There might be a few more adjustments to zerg units down the road but for now saying "Zerg sucks fix it now" is a bit of an exaggeration.
I mostly disagree with you. Being a 400-500ish diamond Zerg myself (and 500ish protoss) at phase 2 (on different accounts) and practicing with one of the most famous zerg "SLush" almost every week makes me think that you are wrong on some of your points). Altho I agree that you made some valid points I think that whats being said about zerg is true.
Tech Switches Altho I agree that zergs can switch tech on a dime, there is currently a problem on "how fast you can get those NEEDED techs". vP colossus will always get out before you can get your tier3 (ultralisk/broolords) and will annihilate your zerglins/ hydra/ roache force. The collosus is an EASY unit to micro and is REALLY potent on many maps. You can get corrupters to deal with them but in all honesty most protoss players including myself get soooo many stalkers that it's almost not good to get corrupter. If you stop for a sec to get hydras or roaches you are dead... so ultralisks normaly comes late (aka when your opp has around 4-5 colossus) and you just have to hope that he's not going to do TOO much damage or make some mistakes before you get ultras. Altho I agree that ZvP is probably the most balanced matchup right now. vT thors/tank are normaly out by the time you can get infestors/hydralisks and to fight tanks/thors you definaly need either ultras or broods. So this is where 1 problem resides.
Mobility I find it funny that in SC2 players still tend to say that zerg has alot of mobility. In SC:BW zerg DEFINATLY had alot of mobility and I would agree with you that any zergs not abusing mobility in SC:BW would lose... but FFS SC2 zerg has mobility ONLY on creep. Zerg mobility in SC2 is clearly an UTOPIA or you're basicaly talking about speedlings? Creep = defensive not offensive and currently where zergs lacks the most is OFFENSIVE. As far as AIR mobility I find the phoenix to be more "mobile" than any zerg air force. Nydus is laughed by alot of pro simply cause the worm can get killed in the 3hrs it takes to get him out and finaly if you get him out units will get out 1 by 1 can you spell "D u c k S h o o t i n g R a n g e" ?? I mean if your army would get all out at once... it would be FREAKING good perhaps too good. but right now a 3hrs build time that cost OOOHHHH so many gaz and than you have this 1 by 1 unit getting out... please to say that nydus is a valid solution.... It's rather a cheese you can use early game to slip in some banelings. Also... on maps such as Kulas Ravine, Lost Temple.... I'd say that Terran has alot more "mobility" than zergs. Hell late game protoss with blink/colossus and air has alot more mobility than zergs.
Unit Production I do agree with you that zergs unit production is kinda good. However the queen larva injection IS the most obnoxius macro ability compared to the 2 other races. It really requires dedication and you're being punished for keeping energy on your queens. Terrans has 150 energy? no problem trade them for ~900 minerals right away a DT is in your base "LOL" I missed a mule CD and I'm now rewarded for it. Protoss has 150 energy? Boom 3 techs are being researched at the speed of light I need more probes boom! done!. Zerg has 150 energy? eh... well i'll do a creeptumor here and there... oh and there... and there... and.... there... ahh my unit has taken 12 damage here transfuse. See what I mean? I do agree that when kept on top of the game queen is really strong but you don't get anything else. Also I want to point out that queen is the ONLY air support zerg has in tier 1 and 1.5 and yet loosing to 1 voidray and 1 banshee. Basicaly you need 1.67 queen PER voidray/banshee and while they are defending air you're not using your superb macro ability while the protoss and terrans are just laughing.... which is ridiculous! On the other hand, if you really get to late game and finaly get a 200/200 army, if it gets decimated (which it will be) you'll be able to get your 200/200 back in no time... so I somewhat agree with you on this point.
Conclusion Or should I say reflection, I know that the game (or rather the beta) hasn't been studied as BW, but I must admit that Zergs unit choices isn't that hard to find since they have sooo few units and each units are used against X composition. I mean protoss and terrans will find new things to do with their 12 and 13 units but zergs with 9 units.... I mean common the race has already been viewed and studied in and out. I also want to point some FACTS:
1. A lot of whining/complaints from zergs, mostly none from protoss and none from terrans at all 2. Terrans/Protoss are dominating latest tournaments 3. Best random player switching to terran. Because he wins more games with it. As simple as that (speaking of TLO) and to be honest he was a REALLY good zerg... so why not choosing zerg? 4. Most statistics showing lacks of zerg players in the top ranking 5. Games, where terran fails to properly harass/attack opponent and yet they are leading. 6. Miracle comebacks. I've never seen them in Zerg 7. Games, where zerg are in clear advantage and somehow lose without doing any major mistake. 8. Some complaints from pros (Dimaga, IdrA......). 9. Several pro players currently playing Zergs are currently thinking on switching if blizzard don't fix zergs starting with one of the most known zerg (idra) and calculated by alot of player like THE BEST zerg. Altho I don't think he's THE BEST zerg (I think that sen was better) I still think that he's freaking good. I mean, I'm not Albert Einstein but when THE BEST zerg player is currently saying that zerg sucks and plans on switching to terran....... it says alot. If the best zerg fails to prove us all wrong how to you want to masses to be with you?
On July 22 2010 07:22 floor exercise wrote: I don't like how bad they are off creep, that's my biggest complaint. I feel almost encouraged not to leave creep unless I can absolutely win with an a-move
Thats kinda why zerg is awesome imo- they can expand like crazy, and you cant touch them on their home ground cuz they are too fast. Then, if you let them get out of control- they kill you with an a-move .
On July 22 2010 07:11 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: Okay so I can't count how many QQ threads I've seen on Zerg being underpowered how it's uncreative it needs changes blah blah blah. Well I play zerg and I'm constantly around some of the best zergs around and generally I tend to disagree and I'm about to explain why.
Unlike other races where you need to build a whole new production facility to make a new set of units such as a factory a stargate, the zerg only needs to wait on a single tech building and then every single hatch/lair/hive can produce that unit. This makes Zerg the undeniable king of Tech Switching, yes the tech buildings can take quite a while to build but this is to balance out the fact that as soon as it's done there can be 20+ of that unit hatching at any given time.
This kind of rapid unit composition switching is unparalleled by the other races especially terran who has to deal with addons and switching them around if they want to change their unit composition even while dealing with the same units.
The zerg air army can be very frightening when used correctly, creep giving movement boosts when exploited allows for aggressive creep expansion letting the zerg dominate the map early on in the game. Later in the game Nydus networks allow a zerg to move their army from one corner of the map to the other in the blink of an eye. Fungal Growth used effectively can stop the mobility of their opponents completely. Zerg is capable of out maneuvering every other race in the game with the exeption of the use of mass recall by protoss but that has limited uses when compared to a good nydus network setup.
Zerg has the capability to reproduce units faster than any other race with the queen mechanics, larva spit is so completely powerful and watching the top zergs at the moment you will see that even they don't miss larva injections. The zerg macro mechanic is tough to deal with as you have to manage every hatchery seperately requiring a lot more multitasking than warpins or dealing with add-ons. But when done effectively the rate at which a zerg can produce units is rather scary.
Zerg has many mechanics that still have not been used to their fullest:
Larva Injection (yes pros still mess this up)
Transfusion strategies
Contamination
Nydus Networks both offensively and defensively
So until this game is released and players get the time to REALLY get their hands on zerg and play with it and experiment then I don't think it's right to really be commenting on how zerg is broken it doesn't work yada yada. Previously people complained that Ultras werent usable and that they were the reason why zerg didn't have any units and now Ultras are being used in top level play somewhat. There might be a few more adjustments to zerg units down the road but for now saying "Zerg sucks fix it now" is a bit of an exaggeration.
I mostly disagree with you. Being a 400-500ish diamond Zerg myself (and 500ish protoss) at phase 2 (on different accounts) and practicing with one of the most famous zerg "SLush" almost every week makes me think that you are wrong on some of your points). Altho I agree that you made some valid points I think that whats being said about zerg is true.
Tech Switches Altho I agree that zergs can switch tech on a dime, there is currently a problem on "how fast you can get those NEEDED techs". vP colossus will always get out before you can get your tier3 (ultralisk/broolords) and will annihilate your zerglins/ hydra/ roache force. The collosus is an EASY unit to micro and is REALLY potent on many maps. You can get corrupters to deal with them but in all honesty most protoss players including myself get soooo many stalkers that it's almost not good to get corrupter. If you stop for a sec to get hydras or roaches you are dead... so ultralisks normaly comes late (aka when your opp has around 4-5 colossus) and you just have to hope that he's not going to do TOO much damage or make some mistakes before you get ultras. Altho I agree that ZvP is probably the most balanced matchup right now. vT thors/tank are normaly out by the time you can get infestors/hydralisks and to fight tanks/thors you definaly need either ultras or broods. So this is where 1 problem resides.
Mobility I find it funny that in SC2 players still tend to say that zerg has alot of mobility. In SC:BW zerg DEFINATLY had alot of mobility and I would agree with you that any zergs not abusing mobility in SC:BW would lose... but FFS SC2 zerg has mobility ONLY on creep. Zerg mobility in SC2 is clearly an UTOPIA or you're basicaly talking about speedlings? Creep = defensive not offensive and currently where zergs lacks the most is OFFENSIVE. As far as AIR mobility I find the phoenix to be more "mobile" than any zerg air force. Nydus is laughed by alot of pro simply cause the worm can get killed in the 3hrs it takes to get him out and finaly if you get him out units will get out 1 by 1 can you spell "D u c k S h o o t i n g R a n g e" ?? I mean if your army would get all out at once... it would be FREAKING good perhaps too good. but right now a 3hrs build time that cost OOOHHHH so many gaz and than you have this 1 by 1 unit getting out... please to say that nydus is a valid solution.... It's rather a cheese you can use early game to slip in some banelings. Also... on maps such as Kulas Ravine, Lost Temple.... I'd say that Terran has alot more "mobility" than zergs. Hell late game protoss with blink/colossus and air has alot more mobility than zergs.
Unit Production I do agree with you that zergs unit production is kinda good. However the queen larva injection IS the most obnoxius macro ability compared to the 2 other races. It really requires dedication and you're being punished for keeping energy on your queens. Terrans has 150 energy? no problem trade them for ~900 minerals right away a DT is in your base "LOL" I missed a mule CD and I'm now rewarded for it. Protoss has 150 energy? Boom 3 techs are being researched at the speed of light I need more probes boom! done!. Zerg has 150 energy? eh... well i'll do a creeptumor here and there... oh and there... and there... and.... there... ahh my unit has taken 12 damage here transfuse. See what I mean? I do agree that when kept on top of the game queen is really strong but you don't get anything else. Also I want to point out that queen is the ONLY air support zerg has in tier 1 and 1.5 and yet loosing to 1 voidray and 1 banshee. Basicaly you need 1.67 queen PER voidray/banshee and while they are defending air you're not using your superb macro ability while the protoss and terrans are just laughing.... which is ridiculous! On the other hand, if you really get to late game and finaly get a 200/200 army, if it gets decimated (which it will be) you'll be able to get your 200/200 back in no time... so I somewhat agree with you on this point.
Conclusion Or should I say reflection, I know that the game (or rather the beta) hasn't been studied as BW, but I must admit that Zergs unit choices isn't that hard to find since they have sooo few units and each units are used against X composition. I mean protoss and terrans will find new things to do with their 12 and 13 units but zergs with 9 units.... I mean common the race has already been viewed and studied in and out. I also want to point some FACTS:
1. A lot of whining/complaints from zergs, mostly none from protoss and none from terrans at all 2. Terrans/Protoss are dominating latest tournaments 3. Best random player switching to terran. Because he wins more games with it. As simple as that (speaking of TLO) and to be honest he was a REALLY good zerg... so why not choosing zerg? 4. Most statistics showing lacks of zerg players in the top ranking 5. Games, where terran fails to properly harass/attack opponent and yet they are leading. 6. Miracle comebacks. I've never seen them in Zerg 7. Games, where zerg are in clear advantage and somehow lose without doing any major mistake. 8. Some complaints from pros (Dimaga, IdrA......). 9. Several pro players currently playing Zergs are currently thinking on switching if blizzard don't fix zergs starting with one of the most known zerg (idra) and calculated by alot of player like THE BEST zerg. Altho I don't think he's THE BEST zerg (I think that sen was better) I still think that he's freaking good. I mean, I'm not Albert Einstein but when THE BEST zerg player is currently saying that zerg sucks and plans on switching to terran....... it says alot. If the best zerg fails to prove us all wrong how to you want to masses to be with you?
On July 22 2010 22:18 arnold(soTa) wrote: you missed my point entirely, you need flawless injections (meaning you inject larvae the instant your larvae spawns) to contend with terran/protoss unit production. and that is close to impossible.. missing mules and chronos does NOT hurt in teh same way BECAUSE YOU CAN CAST MULTIPLE AT ONCE.
This should be queite clear..
Yes, but P/T must flawlessly queue every unit before the previous one finishes (or use warpgate cooldown immediately) to avoid wasting production time. Queen injection is the only thing that makes our macro equal to theirs, otherwise it would just be 5szzzzzzzzzz all the time. We can choose to PRODUCE units FROM LARVA at any time, and larva will continue to spawn with no loss of production (up to the cap of 3). Adding the Queen makes Zerg have to actually look at our bases once in a while.
that is actually a very good point, but I still think its harder to maintain seemless injections than pump units with hotkeys. Remember that Z also has to produce units, and has to expand the creep.. which is now so gimped with the tumor being made half as good in the latest patch going from 15 to 30 seconds. Honestly I think its good that you have to be very active with your macro as Zerg. My complaint was more geared towards terran/protoss being much easier in that way rather than Zerg being hard: ) Like imagine if every 25 realtime seconds or wahtever the number exactly is, you had to go back to your orbital command and put down a mule, or you would lose the energy :-O) that is kinda the spot Z is in.
Sure you can spend the extra energy on creep tumors but Its most often not worth migrating a queen to inject on another hatchery/expansion unless you have a very good creepspread.. maybe queens should get a speedbuff ON creep and remain as slow off it? I duno... I dont really like Zerg being slow unless they are on creep, its cool in theory but doesnt really fit well with gameplay imo. Zergs tend to expand and react-
Opponent expands because you expanded? you take a third, possibly a fourth. opponent techs? you counter it while harassing ..etc I dont think Zerg has many offensive options early game at all, except banelingbusts which are effective dont get me wrong, but I disslike the all-inisch nature of that strategy.
Like what can a Zerg do at tier1 ? speedlings and roaches...roaches move horrendously slow off creep - so much so that its basiclly not worth attacking often because you cant really retreat if need be. also he will have 9 bases by the time you get there speedlings are nice, but not like in sc1 because of the easy fashion in which any P/T can wallin.
I think it was a big misstake moving hydras to tier2. That is prob my biggest gripe with Zerg in sc2. I still enjoy playing Z but I wont give up playing Terran just yet.. I still need a big gun to pull out in a tournament if need be :D
i agree with your post. I think the majority of the complaining is that i think zerg is equally strong, but hardest to pick up to decent level of play and they perceive this as imbalance. New players will struggle very hard with zerg at the start. I personally was stuck in gold (phase 1) until i got my build orders and "when to drone" timing down. I was in platinum right before they introduced diamond league and i was still only about 50%. After taking the break to watch replays and VODS i started spreading creep properly and learned some timing of when to use queen energy, and started using infestors more, and learning how to manage my money to essentially just to have the units i need. I quickly moved up to diamond and im only doing about a 1/4 of the things i know i need to do to use zerg at its potential. I think zerg has a longer learning curve to get to a competant level of play. (mimicing pro's without the precision) It will take quite some time before most of these tools the zerg has become second nature and they start getting creative, but eventually people will be like "ok so maybe i lied about zerg being weak". Of course there will always be complainers.
I'm not entirely sure about Zerg being even with the other two races. As a Protoss player, PvZ and PvT both feel almost perfectly balanced to me, but from watching and hearing about ZvTs, I just don't see how anybody could call them balanced. Every solution that I have heard people propose requires the Zerg to be so much more active and skilled than the Terran, while the Terran needs to do relatively very little. Essentially, Zerg need to be constantly attacking at every possible location, scouting, harassing, and expanding, while Terran just need to macro off of 2 bases and park tanks in a few locations with good positioning. Correct me if I'm wrong about that, but that's essentially what I've seen and heard, and that's really not fair.
On July 22 2010 07:11 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: Okay so I can't count how many QQ threads I've seen on Zerg being underpowered how it's uncreative it needs changes blah blah blah. Well I play zerg and I'm constantly around some of the best zergs around and generally I tend to disagree and I'm about to explain why.
Unlike other races where you need to build a whole new production facility to make a new set of units such as a factory a stargate, the zerg only needs to wait on a single tech building and then every single hatch/lair/hive can produce that unit. This makes Zerg the undeniable king of Tech Switching, yes the tech buildings can take quite a while to build but this is to balance out the fact that as soon as it's done there can be 20+ of that unit hatching at any given time.
This kind of rapid unit composition switching is unparalleled by the other races especially terran who has to deal with addons and switching them around if they want to change their unit composition even while dealing with the same units.
The zerg air army can be very frightening when used correctly, creep giving movement boosts when exploited allows for aggressive creep expansion letting the zerg dominate the map early on in the game. Later in the game Nydus networks allow a zerg to move their army from one corner of the map to the other in the blink of an eye. Fungal Growth used effectively can stop the mobility of their opponents completely. Zerg is capable of out maneuvering every other race in the game with the exeption of the use of mass recall by protoss but that has limited uses when compared to a good nydus network setup.
Zerg has the capability to reproduce units faster than any other race with the queen mechanics, larva spit is so completely powerful and watching the top zergs at the moment you will see that even they don't miss larva injections. The zerg macro mechanic is tough to deal with as you have to manage every hatchery seperately requiring a lot more multitasking than warpins or dealing with add-ons. But when done effectively the rate at which a zerg can produce units is rather scary.
Zerg has many mechanics that still have not been used to their fullest:
Larva Injection (yes pros still mess this up)
Transfusion strategies
Contamination
Nydus Networks both offensively and defensively
So until this game is released and players get the time to REALLY get their hands on zerg and play with it and experiment then I don't think it's right to really be commenting on how zerg is broken it doesn't work yada yada. Previously people complained that Ultras werent usable and that they were the reason why zerg didn't have any units and now Ultras are being used in top level play somewhat. There might be a few more adjustments to zerg units down the road but for now saying "Zerg sucks fix it now" is a bit of an exaggeration.
I mostly disagree with you. Being a 400-500ish diamond Zerg myself (and 500ish protoss) at phase 2 (on different accounts) and practicing with one of the most famous zerg "SLush" almost every week makes me think that you are wrong on some of your points). Altho I agree that you made some valid points I think that whats being said about zerg is true.
Tech Switches Altho I agree that zergs can switch tech on a dime, there is currently a problem on "how fast you can get those NEEDED techs". vP colossus will always get out before you can get your tier3 (ultralisk/broolords) and will annihilate your zerglins/ hydra/ roache force. The collosus is an EASY unit to micro and is REALLY potent on many maps. You can get corrupters to deal with them but in all honesty most protoss players including myself get soooo many stalkers that it's almost not good to get corrupter. If you stop for a sec to get hydras or roaches you are dead... so ultralisks normaly comes late (aka when your opp has around 4-5 colossus) and you just have to hope that he's not going to do TOO much damage or make some mistakes before you get ultras. Altho I agree that ZvP is probably the most balanced matchup right now. vT thors/tank are normaly out by the time you can get infestors/hydralisks and to fight tanks/thors you definaly need either ultras or broods. So this is where 1 problem resides.
Mobility I find it funny that in SC2 players still tend to say that zerg has alot of mobility. In SC:BW zerg DEFINATLY had alot of mobility and I would agree with you that any zergs not abusing mobility in SC:BW would lose... but FFS SC2 zerg has mobility ONLY on creep. Zerg mobility in SC2 is clearly an UTOPIA or you're basicaly talking about speedlings? Creep = defensive not offensive and currently where zergs lacks the most is OFFENSIVE. As far as AIR mobility I find the phoenix to be more "mobile" than any zerg air force. Nydus is laughed by alot of pro simply cause the worm can get killed in the 3hrs it takes to get him out and finaly if you get him out units will get out 1 by 1 can you spell "D u c k S h o o t i n g R a n g e" ?? I mean if your army would get all out at once... it would be FREAKING good perhaps too good. but right now a 3hrs build time that cost OOOHHHH so many gaz and than you have this 1 by 1 unit getting out... please to say that nydus is a valid solution.... It's rather a cheese you can use early game to slip in some banelings. Also... on maps such as Kulas Ravine, Lost Temple.... I'd say that Terran has alot more "mobility" than zergs. Hell late game protoss with blink/colossus and air has alot more mobility than zergs.
Unit Production I do agree with you that zergs unit production is kinda good. However the queen larva injection IS the most obnoxius macro ability compared to the 2 other races. It really requires dedication and you're being punished for keeping energy on your queens. Terrans has 150 energy? no problem trade them for ~900 minerals right away a DT is in your base "LOL" I missed a mule CD and I'm now rewarded for it. Protoss has 150 energy? Boom 3 techs are being researched at the speed of light I need more probes boom! done!. Zerg has 150 energy? eh... well i'll do a creeptumor here and there... oh and there... and there... and.... there... ahh my unit has taken 12 damage here transfuse. See what I mean? I do agree that when kept on top of the game queen is really strong but you don't get anything else. Also I want to point out that queen is the ONLY air support zerg has in tier 1 and 1.5 and yet loosing to 1 voidray and 1 banshee. Basicaly you need 1.67 queen PER voidray/banshee and while they are defending air you're not using your superb macro ability while the protoss and terrans are just laughing.... which is ridiculous! On the other hand, if you really get to late game and finaly get a 200/200 army, if it gets decimated (which it will be) you'll be able to get your 200/200 back in no time... so I somewhat agree with you on this point.
Conclusion Or should I say reflection, I know that the game (or rather the beta) hasn't been studied as BW, but I must admit that Zergs unit choices isn't that hard to find since they have sooo few units and each units are used against X composition. I mean protoss and terrans will find new things to do with their 12 and 13 units but zergs with 9 units.... I mean common the race has already been viewed and studied in and out. I also want to point some FACTS:
1. A lot of whining/complaints from zergs, mostly none from protoss and none from terrans at all 2. Terrans/Protoss are dominating latest tournaments 3. Best random player switching to terran. Because he wins more games with it. As simple as that (speaking of TLO) and to be honest he was a REALLY good zerg... so why not choosing zerg? 4. Most statistics showing lacks of zerg players in the top ranking 5. Games, where terran fails to properly harass/attack opponent and yet they are leading. 6. Miracle comebacks. I've never seen them in Zerg 7. Games, where zerg are in clear advantage and somehow lose without doing any major mistake. 8. Some complaints from pros (Dimaga, IdrA......). 9. Several pro players currently playing Zergs are currently thinking on switching if blizzard don't fix zergs starting with one of the most known zerg (idra) and calculated by alot of player like THE BEST zerg. Altho I don't think he's THE BEST zerg (I think that sen was better) I still think that he's freaking good. I mean, I'm not Albert Einstein but when THE BEST zerg player is currently saying that zerg sucks and plans on switching to terran....... it says alot. If the best zerg fails to prove us all wrong how to you want to masses to be with you?
Wish I could +1 you, hit the nail on the head.
Same, I would say that zerg is not weaker than protoss or terran but in their current state no matter how much their macro and mechanics are lovable, the way the race is currently designed it will be dead last for years to come.
Something to note on macro zerg macro play is that there's a paradox between the design of the race and large battles. A lot has to do with where the battle takes place
The zerg were designed to be reactionary in military, and aggressive economically. I don't think many people would dispute this. Creep, queens, etc are designed more as a defensive mechanic. However, when it comes to the mid-late game, the fact is that the zerg 200 supply army will wipe versus a terran or protoss 200 supply army considering equal control and unit composition.
The zerg player can remake quite fast, faster than any other race, but that does take SOME time. That means that the end game zerg player better make sure that the fight happens at the opponent's front door and not his. If it happens on your front door, no amount of larvae is going to produce instantly to give you enough units to defend the army that just crushed yours. At the very least, if your battle was in the center, you have a little bit of time to remake.
This fact though goes against the other fact that you have been playing defensively all game. There's no way to contain your opponent without the lurker until you get brood lords, so it is more likely that you are the one contained, albeit on more bases. If you are the one contained, how is it you can make sure that the major battle takes place on the enemy's front door? More likely due to the mechanics present, that the battle takes place on your front, and although you set your larvae to be making, the damage you take to your base before you can reinforce most times can cause you to lose. By the way, you're not the only one reinforcing. Most good t and P players will macro up just as much as you.
On July 22 2010 07:15 Takkara wrote: In my humble opinion,
Zerg is fine as a race, they're just unpolished. Their casters are just not finished, spells are added and removed constantly, and they get swapped a bunch. Roaches aren't finished and need some additional tweaks. Corruptors also seems to fall into that unfinished range.
Compare that to Terran where Blizzard has done such an amazing job. I don't think T is overpowered, I think T is the model. Terran is where the races should be when things are "balanced." Every unit is viable (worst is the Reaper), and almost any tech tree has valid strategies around it.
People mistakenly say "lack of diversity" for Zerg. That's not it. They don't necessarily need any more units, they just need the units they all have to be indispensable in some context. Once all the units have a clear and well-defined niche and an appropriate synergy amongst themselves, the race will feel like T and P.
This won't make them any stronger or weaker. It will just make them have more polish. They're the race that's changed the most probably in the beta and still don't feel settled.
Love you man. I feel exactly the same. I used to be a Zerg player. Now I am random because I enjoy so much the protoss and terran gameplay. Zerg is a little boring compare to the other races.
I really liked zerg since roaches where upped to 2 food. Before that roaches where just so much more cost effective then all the other zerg units (exept maybe broodlords) and you could just steamroll your opponent. But after they kind of balanced the roach(remember day 1 roach? yeah they healed so fast with hive upgrade that immortals couldn´t kill them) I just played a lot more with the other units and the race became much more attractive as a whole.
I also don´t get the whine against terrans. Yeah tanks are strong and they have strong harrasment units but so few people are just nydus worming or dropping and helpless terran base while he is slowly mech pushing. Also spreading your tech is n1 against mech so you can sac a base while you kill his main.
It seems like the zerg strategies didn't change very much throughout the beta. It started at 13 pool / 15 hatch and at the end of the beta it was 13 pool / 15 hatch. The Toss and Terran flexed and evolved their strategies where zerg players didn't seem to evolve in the least. Terran figured out how to beat 13 pool / 15 hatch but Zergs just kept doing it and doing it. I think the zerg are certainly the weakest race of the three but I think much of it still is operator error.
On July 22 2010 07:11 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: Okay so I can't count how many QQ threads I've seen on Zerg being underpowered how it's uncreative it needs changes blah blah blah. Well I play zerg and I'm constantly around some of the best zergs around and generally I tend to disagree and I'm about to explain why.
Unlike other races where you need to build a whole new production facility to make a new set of units such as a factory a stargate, the zerg only needs to wait on a single tech building and then every single hatch/lair/hive can produce that unit. This makes Zerg the undeniable king of Tech Switching, yes the tech buildings can take quite a while to build but this is to balance out the fact that as soon as it's done there can be 20+ of that unit hatching at any given time.
This kind of rapid unit composition switching is unparalleled by the other races especially terran who has to deal with addons and switching them around if they want to change their unit composition even while dealing with the same units.
The zerg air army can be very frightening when used correctly, creep giving movement boosts when exploited allows for aggressive creep expansion letting the zerg dominate the map early on in the game. Later in the game Nydus networks allow a zerg to move their army from one corner of the map to the other in the blink of an eye. Fungal Growth used effectively can stop the mobility of their opponents completely. Zerg is capable of out maneuvering every other race in the game with the exeption of the use of mass recall by protoss but that has limited uses when compared to a good nydus network setup.
Zerg has the capability to reproduce units faster than any other race with the queen mechanics, larva spit is so completely powerful and watching the top zergs at the moment you will see that even they don't miss larva injections. The zerg macro mechanic is tough to deal with as you have to manage every hatchery seperately requiring a lot more multitasking than warpins or dealing with add-ons. But when done effectively the rate at which a zerg can produce units is rather scary.
Zerg has many mechanics that still have not been used to their fullest:
Larva Injection (yes pros still mess this up)
Transfusion strategies
Contamination
Nydus Networks both offensively and defensively
So until this game is released and players get the time to REALLY get their hands on zerg and play with it and experiment then I don't think it's right to really be commenting on how zerg is broken it doesn't work yada yada. Previously people complained that Ultras werent usable and that they were the reason why zerg didn't have any units and now Ultras are being used in top level play somewhat. There might be a few more adjustments to zerg units down the road but for now saying "Zerg sucks fix it now" is a bit of an exaggeration.
I mostly disagree with you. Being a 400-500ish diamond Zerg myself (and 500ish protoss) at phase 2 (on different accounts) and practicing with one of the most famous zerg "SLush" almost every week makes me think that you are wrong on some of your points). Altho I agree that you made some valid points I think that whats being said about zerg is true.
Tech Switches Altho I agree that zergs can switch tech on a dime, there is currently a problem on "how fast you can get those NEEDED techs". vP colossus will always get out before you can get your tier3 (ultralisk/broolords) and will annihilate your zerglins/ hydra/ roache force. The collosus is an EASY unit to micro and is REALLY potent on many maps. You can get corrupters to deal with them but in all honesty most protoss players including myself get soooo many stalkers that it's almost not good to get corrupter. If you stop for a sec to get hydras or roaches you are dead... so ultralisks normaly comes late (aka when your opp has around 4-5 colossus) and you just have to hope that he's not going to do TOO much damage or make some mistakes before you get ultras. Altho I agree that ZvP is probably the most balanced matchup right now. vT thors/tank are normaly out by the time you can get infestors/hydralisks and to fight tanks/thors you definaly need either ultras or broods. So this is where 1 problem resides.
Mobility I find it funny that in SC2 players still tend to say that zerg has alot of mobility. In SC:BW zerg DEFINATLY had alot of mobility and I would agree with you that any zergs not abusing mobility in SC:BW would lose... but FFS SC2 zerg has mobility ONLY on creep. Zerg mobility in SC2 is clearly an UTOPIA or you're basicaly talking about speedlings? Creep = defensive not offensive and currently where zergs lacks the most is OFFENSIVE. As far as AIR mobility I find the phoenix to be more "mobile" than any zerg air force. Nydus is laughed by alot of pro simply cause the worm can get killed in the 3hrs it takes to get him out and finaly if you get him out units will get out 1 by 1 can you spell "D u c k S h o o t i n g R a n g e" ?? I mean if your army would get all out at once... it would be FREAKING good perhaps too good. but right now a 3hrs build time that cost OOOHHHH so many gaz and than you have this 1 by 1 unit getting out... please to say that nydus is a valid solution.... It's rather a cheese you can use early game to slip in some banelings. Also... on maps such as Kulas Ravine, Lost Temple.... I'd say that Terran has alot more "mobility" than zergs. Hell late game protoss with blink/colossus and air has alot more mobility than zergs.
Unit Production I do agree with you that zergs unit production is kinda good. However the queen larva injection IS the most obnoxius macro ability compared to the 2 other races. It really requires dedication and you're being punished for keeping energy on your queens. Terrans has 150 energy? no problem trade them for ~900 minerals right away a DT is in your base "LOL" I missed a mule CD and I'm now rewarded for it. Protoss has 150 energy? Boom 3 techs are being researched at the speed of light I need more probes boom! done!. Zerg has 150 energy? eh... well i'll do a creeptumor here and there... oh and there... and there... and.... there... ahh my unit has taken 12 damage here transfuse. See what I mean? I do agree that when kept on top of the game queen is really strong but you don't get anything else. Also I want to point out that queen is the ONLY air support zerg has in tier 1 and 1.5 and yet loosing to 1 voidray and 1 banshee. Basicaly you need 1.67 queen PER voidray/banshee and while they are defending air you're not using your superb macro ability while the protoss and terrans are just laughing.... which is ridiculous! On the other hand, if you really get to late game and finaly get a 200/200 army, if it gets decimated (which it will be) you'll be able to get your 200/200 back in no time... so I somewhat agree with you on this point.
Conclusion Or should I say reflection, I know that the game (or rather the beta) hasn't been studied as BW, but I must admit that Zergs unit choices isn't that hard to find since they have sooo few units and each units are used against X composition. I mean protoss and terrans will find new things to do with their 12 and 13 units but zergs with 9 units.... I mean common the race has already been viewed and studied in and out. I also want to point some FACTS:
1. A lot of whining/complaints from zergs, mostly none from protoss and none from terrans at all 2. Terrans/Protoss are dominating latest tournaments 3. Best random player switching to terran. Because he wins more games with it. As simple as that (speaking of TLO) and to be honest he was a REALLY good zerg... so why not choosing zerg? 4. Most statistics showing lacks of zerg players in the top ranking 5. Games, where terran fails to properly harass/attack opponent and yet they are leading. 6. Miracle comebacks. I've never seen them in Zerg 7. Games, where zerg are in clear advantage and somehow lose without doing any major mistake. 8. Some complaints from pros (Dimaga, IdrA......). 9. Several pro players currently playing Zergs are currently thinking on switching if blizzard don't fix zergs starting with one of the most known zerg (idra) and calculated by alot of player like THE BEST zerg. Altho I don't think he's THE BEST zerg (I think that sen was better) I still think that he's freaking good. I mean, I'm not Albert Einstein but when THE BEST zerg player is currently saying that zerg sucks and plans on switching to terran....... it says alot. If the best zerg fails to prove us all wrong how to you want to masses to be with you?
I'm saving your post. Great stuff, summed up my thoughts exactly.
Can we please stop using a known whiner/excuse maker as a reputable source?
I'm also really tired of all of this endless theorizing without evidence beyond "Idra sez" to back it up. I haven't made my mind up yet re: Z and how much help, if any, they need, but I'll say for sure that NONE of these posts have convinced me of anything at all. Just for an example of the typical crap people post:
The collosus is an EASY unit to micro and is REALLY potent on many maps. You can get corrupters to deal with them but in all honesty most protoss players including myself get soooo many stalkers that it's almost not good to get corrupter. If you stop for a sec to get hydras or roaches you are dead... so ultralisks normaly comes late (aka when your opp has around 4-5 colossus) and you just have to hope that he's not going to do TOO much damage or make some mistakes before you get ultras
This means absolutely nothing. Saying you can't stop making hydra or roach without, talking about CRITICAL MASS of collosi as if there is no chance to force an engagement before that number is reached but oh wait also he's got more stalkers than you could possibly deal with so corrupters are out... all without any replays to back it up.
And for people talking about the Idra v Huk match on LT and how it was close even though Huk forgot Thermal Lance... Idra got too many corrupters. After all the collosi were dead he had what, 8+ corrupter left? That's a ton of recourses/supply. And Idra attacked OVER the front of Huk's army instead of flanking with the corrupters and forcing the stalkers out of position.
Post replays proving what you're saying for goddsake.
On July 23 2010 03:05 Tenks wrote: I haven't read every page but ...
It seems like the zerg strategies didn't change very much throughout the beta. It started at 13 pool / 15 hatch and at the end of the beta it was 13 pool / 15 hatch. The Toss and Terran flexed and evolved their strategies where zerg players didn't seem to evolve in the least. Terran figured out how to beat 13 pool / 15 hatch but Zergs just kept doing it and doing it. I think the zerg are certainly the weakest race of the three but I think much of it still is operator error.
This is somewhat true, but the conclusion you've drawn isn't. First of all, I actually think one-base strats have become more popular as the Beta went on, especially on certain maps (another key point is that with the exception of Metalopolis, Zerg's are always at a map disadvantage currently).
Anyways, the reason you've seen Terran evolving exponentially faster than Zerg is because Zerg have no early game options...they can't open differently because every strategy revolves around the first Spawn Larvae. Before that first batch pops, there's nothing Zerg can do (short of 6-pool, lol). If Zerg goes all-in with lings, Roaches, or blings and fails, it's over -- not because of the investment, but because the larvae wasn't being used on drones. Zerg need to have a macro advantage to even compete in the mid-late game, which is why so many Zerg's go for the fast expand because it's actaully the SAFER play (which is completely illogical). If Terran does a MM push or Hellion push, they can transition a thousand differnt ways safely and keep their economy up.
Zerg is dead. How many times through the beta have we seen "Zerg is dead!" and "Zerg is not Dead!" threads? I think thats a clear sign that its jacked. Zerg players are caught wanting to give up but also having that determination to stick with it and make Zerg work. But i think most will give up if zerg does not change.
Once more protoss starts figuring out they can win with just phoenixes. Once all terrans learn how to transition multiple harass. Its clearly over for Zerg.
Its over for me. I dont want to play turtle Zerg with 8 creep colonies. and be constantly at the mercy of whatever harass is thrown at me.
On July 22 2010 07:15 Takkara wrote: In my humble opinion,
Zerg is fine as a race, they're just unpolished. Their casters are just not finished, spells are added and removed constantly, and they get swapped a bunch. Roaches aren't finished and need some additional tweaks. Corruptors also seems to fall into that unfinished range.
Compare that to Terran where Blizzard has done such an amazing job. I don't think T is overpowered, I think T is the model. Terran is where the races should be when things are "balanced." Every unit is viable (worst is the Reaper), and almost any tech tree has valid strategies around it.
People mistakenly say "lack of diversity" for Zerg. That's not it. They don't necessarily need any more units, they just need the units they all have to be indispensable in some context. Once all the units have a clear and well-defined niche and an appropriate synergy amongst themselves, the race will feel like T and P.
This won't make them any stronger or weaker. It will just make them have more polish. They're the race that's changed the most probably in the beta and still don't feel settled.
Eh, Idk Takkara, Perhaps there are more changes to come, but as for each unit not having a clearly defined role, I disagree. Roaches are our tanks, hydras our dps, and zlings are our paperdoll scouts/cannon-fodder. Mutas are a nice all-purpose air unit, corrupters are the tanky support air unit, and blords are the ultimate anti-ground flyer. Ultralisks are the big-nasty bug-zillas, and infestors are our support casters. I see well defined roles. The problem is that people expect the races to behave similarly. Personally, I don't want a bug that behave just like a zealot, or a toss unit that does the same thing as a banshee, but I want the races to be different, the more so, the better. And as for reapers not being viable, I disagree again, they're freaking scary( when micro'd properly, of course). In any case, the fast expansion, creep spreading through tumors/olord-peeing/etc., nydus transport, tech-switching, etc. make the Zerg a unique and refreshing addition to the game. ~Duncan Idaho
Zerg doesn't have nuke, and therefore is underpowered (same applies to Protoss and any Terran who doesn't actually USE Nukes [so basically everyone except Lz]).
On July 23 2010 03:41 DanielD wrote: Post replays proving what you're saying for goddsake.
Watch Idra vs Tester game 1 - He gets caged and played REALLY well even if left on 1 base. Goes of mass lings since he's only able to do that (could have gotten roaches but didn't have the econ to do it since his natural was blocked) and did a spine to get out. Goes with 41287481234294 lings and gets stoped by 1 sentry and 1 zealot and 1 canon.
Ok not the best zerg games I've seen but still... HELL Tester even did 2 cybergate and chronoest the wrong one and still wins under 10min mark!! LOLOLOLOLOLOL!
Watch IdrA vs Tester game 2 - well setuped game I would say that IdrA was ahead till the 12ish min mark (when I was pumping hydras) but for some reason he never really had the chance to attack... anyways not a problem he goes ultralisks and in the mean time Tester landed 2 robo started to pump 3-4 colossus and won the game before IdrA was able to run with ultralisks.
Dimaga vs IntoTheRainbow game 1 Clearly lost with Roach aggressive play and his opp had expanded before him
Dimaga vs IntoTheRainbow game 2 Clearly lost cause he was with Roaches/Hydra vs Thors!!! ROFL
Yah, and those are just but 2 of the best zerg COMPETING FOR 3000$$ these are not show matches where they only gain fame and try things out. I REPETE THEY ARE COMPETING FOR 3000$$!!!!!
and than on their 2nd tries they all lose 1 match!... and thats just the start...
On July 23 2010 03:41 DanielD wrote: Post replays proving what you're saying for goddsake.
Watch Idra vs Tester game 1 - He gets caged and played REALLY well even if left on 1 base. Goes of mass lings since he's only able to do that (could have gotten roaches but didn't have the econ to do it since his natural was blocked) and did a spine to get out. Goes with 41287481234294 lings and gets stoped by 1 sentry and 1 zealot and 1 canon.
Ok not the best zerg games I've seen but still... HELL Tester even did 2 cybergate and chronoest the wrong one and still wins under 10min mark!! LOLOLOLOLOLOL!
Watch IdrA vs Tester game 2 - well setuped game I would say that IdrA was ahead till the 12ish min mark (when I was pumping hydras) but for some reason he never really had the chance to attack... anyways not a problem he goes ultralisks and in the mean time Tester landed 2 robo started to pump 3-4 colossus and won the game before IdrA was able to run with ultralisks.
Dimaga vs IntoTheRainbow game 1 Clearly lost with Roach aggressive play and his opp had expanded before him
Dimaga vs IntoTheRainbow game 2 Clearly lost cause he was with Roaches/Hydra vs Thors!!! ROFL
Yah, and those are just but 2 of the best zerg COMPETING FOR 3000$$ these are not show matches where they only gain fame and try things out. I REPETE THEY ARE COMPETING FOR 3000$$!!!!!
and than on their 2nd tries they all lose 1 match!... and thats just the start...
I'm sorry, but game 2 of the idra vs tester. Idra didn't scout the double robo he had no answer to the collosus gtfo. He scouted the collosus right before the push, he would of won if he had ultra/corruptors easily. His macro was insane and unit control was the best I've seen so far in that game.
I also don't think Dimaga played well against Rainbow at all in that series.
On July 23 2010 03:41 DanielD wrote: Post replays proving what you're saying for goddsake.
Watch Idra vs Tester game 1 - He gets caged and played REALLY well even if left on 1 base. Goes of mass lings since he's only able to do that (could have gotten roaches but didn't have the econ to do it since his natural was blocked) and did a spine to get out. Goes with 41287481234294 lings and gets stoped by 1 sentry and 1 zealot and 1 canon.
Ok not the best zerg games I've seen but still... HELL Tester even did 2 cybergate and chronoest the wrong one and still wins under 10min mark!! LOLOLOLOLOLOL!
Watch IdrA vs Tester game 2 - well setuped game I would say that IdrA was ahead till the 12ish min mark (when I was pumping hydras) but for some reason he never really had the chance to attack... anyways not a problem he goes ultralisks and in the mean time Tester landed 2 robo started to pump 3-4 colossus and won the game before IdrA was able to run with ultralisks.
Dimaga vs IntoTheRainbow game 1 Clearly lost with Roach aggressive play and his opp had expanded before him
Dimaga vs IntoTheRainbow game 2 Clearly lost cause he was with Roaches/Hydra vs Thors!!! ROFL
Yah, and those are just but 2 of the best zerg COMPETING FOR 3000$$ these are not show matches where they only gain fame and try things out. I REPETE THEY ARE COMPETING FOR 3000$$!!!!!
and than on their 2nd tries they all lose 1 match!... and thats just the start...
Dimaga played desperate from the very start, the first game he had terrible micro (could have attacked repairing scvs but didn't) and the second game was just a headscratcher, taking the gold late and building those roaches that did absolutely nothing.
The first game Idra got thrown off his game and instead of trying to tech at all or simply saving up 300 mins to expand (or 600 to double expand) he goes for an all-in ling bust against a wall in the freakin' NATURAL (as in, all those lings are useless since a contain means nothing when you can take your natural) and game 2 was a nice juke by tester combined with Idra being a scaredy-cat-macro-whore and not pressuring enough.
I just re-read your post and realized you basically made no points besides describing the games.... feel really silly having responded but I already typed it all out =/
On July 23 2010 03:05 Tenks wrote: I haven't read every page but ...
It seems like the zerg strategies didn't change very much throughout the beta. It started at 13 pool / 15 hatch and at the end of the beta it was 13 pool / 15 hatch. The Toss and Terran flexed and evolved their strategies where zerg players didn't seem to evolve in the least. Terran figured out how to beat 13 pool / 15 hatch but Zergs just kept doing it and doing it. I think the zerg are certainly the weakest race of the three but I think much of it still is operator error.
Wrong, it started at 13 pool 15 hatch, and turned into.
14 pool 15 hatch into speedlings 14 pool 15 hatch into banelings 14 pool 15 hatch into minimal lings with roaches 14 pool 15 hatch into minimal lings fast tech to hydras 14 gas 14 pool speedlings into mutas 1 base sen style
Just a few, didn't feel like posting them all. Very viable all of these, and have been proven in tournaments. It isn't the same, it's just the opening seems the same. I mean when you say all terrans build their rax at the same time, after a depot, at the same place against zerg, then yes you can make terran look like there was no development either.
On July 22 2010 20:36 lovewithlea wrote: why people feel like zerg is underpowered is due to the fact if you don't play one base and instead fast expand early, you put yourself in a position where you wont be able to put any pressure on your opponent and only can react to what he does until like 10 minutes in the game. thus scouting becomes crucial, if you miss any tech switches hidden techs or anything your opponent does your gonna be catched offguard pretty easy.
all this makes you feal powerless playing zerg. but in my opinion this ain't a problem. there are enough good zergs that have shown that there are ways to deal with it.
some tweaking will always be needed but imo Blizz did a pretty good job so far
What a load. I play pretty much only one base and it isn't much help. Any Terran or Toss player is going to block his ramp before you can get more than a couple zerglings in (and then only if you're extremely fast). Banelings are our only option to get into the base during the early game and it is an allin strategy that can backfire quite easily with 1 misclick. 1 base Muta is more reasonable, but if your opponent scouts and you fail to do significant damage, you will be so far down in econ your opponent can just sit back and play defensively forcing you to take on the attacking disadvantage and most likely lose the game. If 1 base zerg was so viable, you wouldn't see nearly the amount of all-in strats by players like Gerrard, Haypro, and Dimaga. Right now, the Zerg have a few gimmicks that work well, but players are quickly learning these cheap tricks. The lack of depth and versatility in Zerg units creates an uphill battle that is very frustrating. Everyone is still learning how to play their race well, so I'm not buying that BS line that Zerg players need to learn their race better.
On July 23 2010 04:30 DanielD wrote: Dimaga played desperate from the very start,
and my question to you.... why do you think he played desesperatly despite the fact that he's one of the top Zerg players?
Edit I would like to ask one more question...
There has been COUNTLESS posts about zergs being up and the such... instead of asking proofs of why zergs are UP... just give us proofs that zergs are fine. please post replays of top players where zergs did fine against and equal level opponent. please state your opinion on why zergs are perfectly balanced an Zergs need to L2P.
I'm seriously fed of all the arguments I,m trying to bring and the only thing you ahve to say is... replays, proofs, gogo, I don't trust you blah blah... it's jsut too easy for your to counter. I've stated my opinion which seems to be shared (read post thats +1) now I would like to ear your counter-argument rather than just asking me to proof my saying!
On July 23 2010 04:30 DanielD wrote: Dimaga played desperate from the very start,
and my question to you.... why do you think he played desesperatly despite the fact that he's one of the top Zerg players?
Because he was nervous.... ITR is an Korean ex-pro whose team is DOMINATING the Korean sc2 scene, the tournament is for a lot of money, and Dimaga is relatively new to competitive formats like this (looking at his liquipedia page shows all of his achievements have been in 2010).
I see what you're getting at but how Dimaga feels is besides the point, it's the way the games are played that counts and Dimaga didn't play well enough to prove anything about balance.
On July 23 2010 04:40 DanielD wrote: I see what you're getting at but how Dimaga feels is besides the point, it's the way the games are played that counts and Dimaga didn't play well enough to prove anything about balance.
Ok I can agree with you... but on the other hand... do you think that IdrA did a good job? I'm sorry if you don't think so... cause I do feel like IdrA was on the top of his game. And as I stated in my post, this dude is for many players the "best zerg around". Would you not say that he was in REALLY good shape and than 1 unit is made and counter all of his army?! I don't know it sounds a bit cheesy. When roaches where 1 supply things like this never happened cause the roaches were able to take the hit and zergs were able to survive for THAT period of time needed to tech switch. now it just feels that when your army is dies to the T3 of the 2 other races... it's all over!
Zerg just sucks. Its worse than in sc bw. Whenever my friends watch me play. They go whoah force field that was sick, whoah reapers badass. And they go wtf is new for Zerg? After watching me defend harass for 5 minutes and then still getting crushed by mech army. IM a huge zerg fan i dont want to play the other races, but Zerg is just pathetic straight up.
On July 23 2010 04:40 DanielD wrote: I see what you're getting at but how Dimaga feels is besides the point, it's the way the games are played that counts and Dimaga didn't play well enough to prove anything about balance.
Ok I can agree with you... but on the other hand... do you think that IdrA did a good job? I'm sorry if you don't think so... cause I do feel like IdrA was on the top of his game. And as I stated in my post, this dude is for many players the "best zerg around". Would you not say that he was in REALLY good shape and than 1 unit is made and counter all of his army?! I don't know it sounds a bit cheesy. When roaches where 1 supply things like this never happened cause the roaches were able to take the hit and zergs were able to survive for THAT period of time needed to tech switch. now it just feels that when your army is dies to the T3 of the 2 other races... it's all over!
I was very disappointed in Idra's play.
I think I already answered these questions... game one he massed lings rather than expand or tech which was a mistake in terms of responses to the cannon rush I feel, obviously a gateway wall with a sentry behind it nullifies mass ling, especially that far into the game.
Game 2 he got fooled! He didn't see the collosi until it was too late. He needed corrupters. But I am going to re-watch Game 2 and tell you what I think.
I don't know if dimaga can be considered standard. He has an extremely different style from every other zerg I've seen. Not that he isn't good, but he is really really big on one base play which, for most zergs, doesn't work out very well. I was extremely surprised when he beat white ra recently, because he was in a desperation situation at that point. Most of the time I see late game baneling plays shut down by a combo of observers and forcefields.
On July 23 2010 04:55 DanielD wrote: I think I already answered these questions... game one he massed lings rather than expand or tech which was a mistake in terms of responses to the cannon rush I feel, obviously a gateway wall with a sentry behind it nullifies mass ling, especially that far into the game.
Game 2 he got fooled! He didn't see the collosi until it was too late. He needed corrupters. But I am going to re-watch Game 2 and tell you what I think.
humm I'm sorry but I can't agree with you on these.
Game#1
If he had expanded or double expanded than teched it would have been WAYYYY tooo late. I mean... it was a do or die. Tester had 4 gates and was about to get his expand running. Being THAT late vs a protoss is a no go... and I know what I'm talking about since I play protoss at 500 diamond level. I just want you to realise something. Could IdrA have been better early on? I mean... not getting caged like a stupid fawk? I doupt it. As pro as he can be... this trick is done with 2 pylons and 1 canon?! he send drones to start hitting and than proceeded. Would you personaly have done better!? I doupt it... not that I say that you are newb, just that I doupt you and I are IdrA's level. When he decided it was time to attack IdrA was denied with
1x Zealot 2x Sentry 1x Canon
.... ?!?!
Game #2
He out expanded Tester, his macro was awesome. He survived the early stage blah blah blah.... he saw the Collosus when he sent the "changeling" in. Which was around 2-3 mins before tester did the final push but at this time it was alraedy too late. You also can't expect a zerg to know everything on the map at the verry second it's made. Its stupid to ask such a thing from players. Protoss don't have to scout if there is a spire or ultra cavern HELL they are doing it ANYWAY!
Conclusion: I don't know you and don't know your level. But I know that we're both not at the level of tester and idra so their might be even more than we are actualy see. The facts stays. They are currently playing for 3000$ so it's not a joke. if they are doing something its cause they think they are doing whats best for them.
I re-watched Game 2... Idra had a chance at 8:30 (going off of day 9's blip archive footage) to take out the majority of not all of Tester's units at the watchtower, take the center and expand to the gold. He also took his natural and 3rd gases late, if you look at his resources when Idra maxes he's at 1000 mins and 0 gas.
Idra was pretty rich when that battle ended, if he had dropped a spire earlier(which he could have done had he not been so gas-deficient), when his changeling saw those 2 collosi he could have put out some corrupters or muta and had a much better chance of winning.... he gg'd because he didn't manage to kill 1 collosus in that first engagement. He also had ZERO roaches, having pure hydra-ling means the lings dissapear instantly and then the hydra are ALL getting hit, roaches in the mix, although they have a lower dps than hydra and thats something you might not want to sacrifice in your 200/200 army, don't sit at the same range as hydra and so cause the collosi to be less effective.
Also Idra was at much higher supply than Tester but rather than attack at all let Tester max and come to him... more agressive creep spreading would have allowed Idra to do a lot more...
Plus Idra didn't even have vision of the destructible rocks path, sort of weird.
Just saw your reply...
As far as game 1 goes, yes the cannon rush really screwed Idra, but 2nd hatch in base was the worst response he could have possibly made. 1 base zerg can do some damage, but those 300 minerals ended up being a complete waste.
And you keep saying:
The facts stays. They are currently playing for 3000$ so it's not a joke. if they are doing something its cause they think they are doing whats best for them.
which doesn't matter. It doesn't mean Idra played well.
You actually can expect zerg to know everything that's being built... that's what overlords are for. Should be checking for stuff every minute or so, not twice in the whole game. It's not like Tester had his whole base cannoned.
There is tons of potential left in all races, the game obviously is not developed to it's full potential. However I find that transfusion has it's vital use early~mid game and late game is loses most of it's viability.
Oh well I tried... but we're definatly not seeing the game with the same eyes!
I would like to know which race you are playing cause it might be the reason you're not seeing the same things. Anyways thats all for me today... I have to get home and do some shiets while the game is down!
On July 23 2010 05:21 Konsume wrote: Oh well I tried... but we're definatly not seeing the game with the same eyes!
I would like to know which race you are playing cause it might be the reason you're not seeing the same things. Anyways thats all for me today... I have to get home and do some shiets while the game is down!
Thx for this civilised discution Daniel
Opinions are opinions
Thanks to you as well
I play Terran by the way, although I have played Z for about a month and am going to learn to play Protoss when the 27th comes.
Its just that Protoss and Terra are much easier to play.
1. You can better harass then Zerg especially in early game.
2. You don't need to take that much macro risk. I mean every Zerg has to learn hard timings just to not end the game with only drones. ..
3. Yes you can tech switch, but is is often not much an surprise, because of the leak in unit diversity and builds are very limited.
4. You have to play sauron zerg, if you do not, you will loose 75% of your games. So the other races are much more flexible in there builds and tactics and they can focus more on micro if they want.
Tech switch usually puts zerg players behind since they'd have to get different upgrades and against Terran or Protoss armies, their composition is basically already prepared for the switch. I'm a random player, formerly zerg so it's still my best, and I see the reason that I beat most P or T as Z is because I play much much better, but if they did things a tiny bit differently, they'd easily beat me. i.e. Protoss getting too many colossi therefore not having enough stalkers to deal with corruptors. Also tech switch is easily scoutable - scan, observers, etc.
Raelcun's counter to a lot of things was using fungal, but if you're good enough to be using fungal that well and your opponent is equally skilled then your opponent can micro out of it or never even let you get it off.
My biggest issue with zerg now is I always feel like zerg is playing from behind, even with an early expand. In BW if your early expo wasn't stopped, it was much more difficult to beat you. I don't think IdrA is that good by any means, just my opinion, but if you do check out his games even when he gets 3 bases running early at the same time, he can still easily lose if he doesn't do everything perfectly. I actually prefer 1 base zerg just because I feel that's the only time zerg can have tech advantage: speedling/roach against P and speedling/baneling/maybe roach against T, but even those are pretty easily stopped if they know it's coming.
I would like to point to the last 2 zotac cups. I would like to point out some of the concerns the best Zerg players have at the moment. I would like to point out that people aren't following the streams enough.
Don't think I will point out more things atm ;D ;D
I re-watched Game 2... Idra had a chance at 8:30 (going off of day 9's blip archive footage) to take out the majority of not all of Tester's units at the watchtower, take the center and expand to the gold. He also took his natural and 3rd gases late, if you look at his resources when Idra maxes he's at 1000 mins and 0 gas.
Idra was pretty rich when that battle ended, if he had dropped a spire earlier(which he could have done had he not been so gas-deficient), when his changeling saw those 2 collosi he could have put out some corrupters or muta and had a much better chance of winning.... he gg'd because he didn't manage to kill 1 collosus in that first engagement. He also had ZERO roaches, having pure hydra-ling means the lings dissapear instantly and then the hydra are ALL getting hit, roaches in the mix, although they have a lower dps than hydra and thats something you might not want to sacrifice in your 200/200 army, don't sit at the same range as hydra and so cause the collosi to be less effective.
Also Idra was at much higher supply than Tester but rather than attack at all let Tester max and come to him... more agressive creep spreading would have allowed Idra to do a lot more...
Plus Idra didn't even have vision of the destructible rocks path, sort of weird.
Just saw your reply...
As far as game 1 goes, yes the cannon rush really screwed Idra, but 2nd hatch in base was the worst response he could have possibly made. 1 base zerg can do some damage, but those 300 minerals ended up being a complete waste.
The facts stays. They are currently playing for 3000$ so it's not a joke. if they are doing something its cause they think they are doing whats best for them.
which doesn't matter. It doesn't mean Idra played well.
You actually can expect zerg to know everything that's being built... that's what overlords are for. Should be checking for stuff every minute or so, not twice in the whole game. It's not like Tester had his whole base cannoned.
Yeah I completely agree (you saved me some writing). In game 1 I don't think the cannon rush screwed IdrA I feel idra panics when he easily could of played that game out. Game 2 - His overseer scouted the double robo right as the big collosus push is heading out (He lacked scouting). He had 2 units that are completely vulnerable to collosus (Tester just reacted correctly) he could of throw down a spire or even teched to ultra off 3 base much earlier which does amazing damage to protoss. Idra made a mistake in game 2 and gave up in game one. That doesn't say something's wrong with zerg, because Idra didn't win; he wasn't mentally focused from what I've seen. Then IdrA comes back and 2-1's Huk.
I don't consider zerg as a bad race but with them you are always two steps behind and zerg is the only race that can't really play from one base. If you one base you are usually doing roach or baneling push, that's it. I know it's always been the case but here it's a lot harder to defend that expansion as 1base play with other races is so strong.
About the Tech switch I think its a very big advantage. Think about the ZvP game from the King of the Beta (think it was IdrA vs Huk ... not sure) toss came with mass Collosis, and the Zerg could counter it relatively easy with Corrupters, because Zerg can tech-switch super fast. A terran or Protoss would have had much more problems with it. Also When a Zerg player looses drones, he can make ten new ones in a blink. Terran and Toss need to make them one by one. Conclusion Tech switch big advantage
On July 23 2010 06:57 Piski wrote: I don't consider zerg as a bad race but with them you are always two steps behind and zerg is the only race that can't really play from one base. If you one base you are usually doing roach or baneling push, that's it. I know it's always been the case but here it's a lot harder to defend that expansion as 1base play with other races is so strong.
IMO terran cant one base mech either. It costs to much gas, and bio vs roaches lings is a good match-up
On July 23 2010 06:59 Deckkie wrote: About the Tech switch I think its a very big advantage. Think about the ZvP game from the King of the Beta (think it was IdrA vs Huk ... not sure) toss came with mass Collosis, and the Zerg could counter it relatively easy with Corrupters, because Zerg can tech-switch super fast. A terran or Protoss would have had much more problems with it. Also When a Zerg player looses drones, he can make ten new ones in a blink. Terran and Toss need to make them one by one. Conclusion Tech switch big advantage
Summary:
You didn't watch the game very closely. You have no concept of the relationship between making drones and making combat units as zerg.
On July 23 2010 06:59 Deckkie wrote: About the Tech switch I think its a very big advantage. Think about the ZvP game from the King of the Beta (think it was IdrA vs Huk ... not sure) toss came with mass Collosis, and the Zerg could counter it relatively easy with Corrupters, because Zerg can tech-switch super fast. A terran or Protoss would have had much more problems with it. Also When a Zerg player looses drones, he can make ten new ones in a blink. Terran and Toss need to make them one by one. Conclusion Tech switch big advantage
Summary:
You didn't watch the game very closely. You have no concept of the relationship between making drones and making combat units as zerg.
Well... Terran or Toss wouldn't be able to make that many anti Collosis units and that short period of time. And for the drone thing, If I lost probes I would absolutely spend 150 minerals at ones to resupply my probes. Which I cant cuz I can only make one at a time
edit: but your right, I have hardly played Zerg, so your probably right
On July 23 2010 06:57 Piski wrote: I don't consider zerg as a bad race but with them you are always two steps behind and zerg is the only race that can't really play from one base. If you one base you are usually doing roach or baneling push, that's it. I know it's always been the case but here it's a lot harder to defend that expansion as 1base play with other races is so strong.
IMO terran cant one base mech either. It costs to much gas, and bio vs roaches lings is a good match-up
Making 10 drones means you won't have 10 army units fighting those 10 units T or P just made. Don't get me wrong I don't consider zerg to be severely underpowered, maybe an underdog.
Tech switching is a big deal yes but as I said zerg is always two steps behind. The tech switching usually happens only to counter opponents forces and now it's just a zerg player bitching but T/P usually already has hard/soft counters to anything zerg can throw at them.
So it usually goes like if you fast tech switch to mutas and he happens to have a thor that's it, it's lights out for zerg as he spent so much on that and didn't do anything.
But like I said I don't consider zerg to be UP, I just think they have lost their ability to dictate the game.
On July 23 2010 06:59 Deckkie wrote: About the Tech switch I think its a very big advantage. Think about the ZvP game from the King of the Beta (think it was IdrA vs Huk ... not sure) toss came with mass Collosis, and the Zerg could counter it relatively easy with Corrupters, because Zerg can tech-switch super fast. A terran or Protoss would have had much more problems with it. Also When a Zerg player looses drones, he can make ten new ones in a blink. Terran and Toss need to make them one by one. Conclusion Tech switch big advantage
Making corruptors isnt a tech switch lol. Scout colossi, make corruptors. Scout colossi, make vikings (with reactor potentially). Harder as terran or toss? Hardly.
Losing probes? You can chrono boost your nexus to build tons more. Losing scvs? you got mules.
Conclusion, its not as big as an advantage as it was in BW. In sc2 this advantage is almost non-existant. Fast zerg production has been almost equalized with warp gates, reactors, and chrono boosts.
Zerg constantly plays from behind. Its z builds up a pre-lair army to keep them alive early game, that will become easily melted once P/T get their tech out. So, Z must scout the tech path, and tech accordingly, all while continuing to macro and produce units in case of a surprise attack. As your teching to hive/den/GS you just hope that you are able to get ur ultras/Broodlords before he decides to push with terran mech for example, but if the terran is smart they wont give you that much time. Once you get your tech out you hope to god its enough to keep you alive and win the battle. Oh, guess what, what if your teching broodlords and an observer rolls and sees the spire? What if a terran scans? They just build the appropriate counter to whatever your getting that your hoping will keep you alive. In the big battle you roll in with ur broodlords and you encounter a ton of blink stalkers or a ton of vikings and ur gg.
Zerg gets countered every step of the way. Its not liek BW where there were no LOLCOLOSSI that will just A-move roflstomp your whole army in small numbers. in bw it was more strategic, it was about micro, it was about outthinking your opponent.
And people who keep saying OH BUT ZERG PLAY WILL EVOLVE. Well, no, it wont. Not unless things get patched to let that happen. Z only has a handful of units, and trust me, people have tried many combinations of Z units and buildings. Z just does not have the tools to be equal in the current state of the game. You may not agree, but its true, and many people agree.
On July 23 2010 07:14 hyouro wrote: Excuse me deckkie, how can you make conclusions like that when you don't even know the basics of a Zerg?
You guys are totally right. I shouldnt assume stuff without knowing. I am sorry for the inconvenience. Guess the first thing for me when the game comes out, wont be playing single player, but training my Zerg.
On July 23 2010 07:14 hyouro wrote: Excuse me deckkie, how can you make conclusions like that when you don't even know the basics of a Zerg?
You guys are totally right. I shouldnt assume stuff without knowing. I am sorry for the inconvenience. Guess the first thing for me when the game comes out, wont be playing single player, but training my Zerg.
you are very polite Deckkie
zerg is cool, i enjoy zerg. But a good zerg should lose to a good terran. I feel okay about the ZvP matchup. But its true that zerg always feels like you're playing from behind. There are so many weaknesses to the race right now and most of its strengths have been nerfed from BW.
I used to list things out but i kinda decided it's not worth it anymore. eventually zerg will get patched or all competitive people will stop playing zerg. But the game's not even out yet.. And there will be a day1 patch most likely. So we'll see what happens. It's nice to see ultralisks actually turn into a semi-viable unit. But they also feel like something you can only pull off if you were able to macro for the whole game and store up 1200 gas so you can pop out 6 as soon as your ultra den finishes
I dont know why everybody points out the mistakes that zerg players do without pointing out the mistakes that the other players have been doing. It seems like theres always ppl grilling zerg players for making a ton of mistakes and providing numerous recommendations that would of clearly win the game for zerg.
Idra obviously made mistakes but hes definately gonna make less mistakes than the typical poster on this forum. You can say that the double hatch was a mistake but it was a surprise attack on tester who was clearly not ready for it. He only had 1 zealot and did not know that Idra had a 2nd hatch to secretly make mass zerglings. Tester also made 2 cybercores and chronoboosted the wrong one. Would that not be a mistake on the protoss' side? Despite making those mistakes though, tester was able to win. Flip the story around where zerg is clearly ahead economically and has food advantage. The zerg player could make any mistake and he'll get crucified and grilled for making that 1 mistake and that is justification for why the zerg shouldnt of won.
Im a biased zerg player and I understand its a reactionary race. I dont know if the game is balanced but I always feel like I have a smaller margin for error than the other races.
On July 23 2010 08:11 Fumble wrote: I dont know why everybody points out the mistakes that zerg players do without pointing out the mistakes that the other players have been doing. It seems like theres always ppl grilling zerg players for making a ton of mistakes and providing numerous recommendations that would of clearly win the game for zerg.
Idra obviously made mistakes but hes definately gonna make less mistakes than the typical poster on this forum. You can say that the double hatch was a mistake but it was a surprise attack on tester who was clearly not ready for it. He only had 1 zealot and did not know that Idra had a 2nd hatch to secretly make mass zerglings. Tester also made 2 cybercores and chronoboosted the wrong one. Would that not be a mistake on the protoss' side? Despite making those mistakes though, tester was able to win. Flip the story around where zerg is clearly ahead economically and has food advantage. The zerg player could make any mistake and he'll get crucified and grilled for making that 1 mistake and that is justification for why the zerg shouldnt of won.
Im a biased zerg player and I understand its a reactionary race. I dont know if the game is balanced but I always feel like I have a smaller margin for error than the other races.
Double cycore = 150 mineral mistake by the guy who was already in the lead b/c he threw Idra off of his game, the chrono boost mistake also pretty marginal, would have mattered more if Idra hadn't GG'd out so early.
The hatch in base was a 300 mineral mistake that compounded itself as he used those larvae for lings, further wasting larvae and minerals on a unit that couldn't do anything for him at that stage of the game.
Idra being better than me or other posters has nothing to do with this discussion fwiw.
I actually have no problems with zerg myself. It isn't underpowered, I feel that it's perfectly balanced, people just aren't playing it properly yet. Zerg as of now is only the macro race. You play it if you love having a huge economy, and being able to pump out units at an unrivaled pace. But i feel like that's the only aspect of Zerg that people are paying attention to. Nydus, contaminate, infested terrans, overlord drop harassment, baneling mines, all sorts of potentially useful strategies are being largely ignored because the current attitude towards the race is "I can win with macro and nothing else".
On July 23 2010 06:59 Deckkie wrote: About the Tech switch I think its a very big advantage. Think about the ZvP game from the King of the Beta (think it was IdrA vs Huk ... not sure) toss came with mass Collosis, and the Zerg could counter it relatively easy with Corrupters, because Zerg can tech-switch super fast. A terran or Protoss would have had much more problems with it. Also When a Zerg player looses drones, he can make ten new ones in a blink. Terran and Toss need to make them one by one. Conclusion Tech switch big advantage
You really haven't thought through anything in your post.
If you're Terran, you likely have a Starport regardless of strategy...if it's MMM, fast banshee, Ravens in Mech, etc. Terran see a Colossus, immediately swap their Starport to a Reactor and start pumping out double Vikings. Zerg, oppositely, can't get all their tech buildings in advance (for obvious reasons), so when Zerg sees a Colossus, they have to build a Spire, which takes roughly 17 minutes, and then change all their unit production into Corrupters, which are completely useless against the rest of the Protoss army and twice the cost of a Viking (the only reason Zerg players make Corrupters is lack of alternatives...they're a terrible unit). That you think Zerg can react and counter a Colossus faster than Terran is ridiculous. And that doesn't even include the point that Colossus don't hard counter all Terran ground like they do with Zerg, meaning unlike Zerg, Terran have several options of response.
You're point about replacing Drones ten at a time isn't an inherent advantage as it costs larvae, meaning that you can't be fortifying your army. I find it amazing how Non-Zerg players view Zerg through rose-colored glasses in nearly every discussion.
On July 23 2010 08:43 tfmdjeff wrote: Nydus, contaminate, infested terrans, overlord drop harassment, baneling mines, all sorts of potentially useful strategies are being largely ignored because the current attitude towards the race is "I can win with macro and nothing else".
Those aren't strategies; they're tactical gimmicks...like Reapers and DT's...they might win you a game here and there, but you can never go into a game with the intention of winning using one of those gimmicks (well, you can, but you won't be a very strong player). If you don't see the fallacy in your logic, you haven't taken a far enough step back. Terran sit in their base, massing tanks, making them impenetrable in the mid-game, and still have the option of harassing with Banshee's, Hellions, Raven's, Dropships, etc. with complete immunity.
Your response is that Zerg should waste money on Nydus, which is fuking terrible. I'm so god damn tired of non-Zerg players telling Zerg players to use Nydus Networks...they're god awful...they take an hour to build and poop out units one at a time to die...you don't see them in high level play because you can't beat a high level player with them!
I'm not going to go through every other gimmick you suggest because they all miss the point...you can't revolve every win around tricks. Imagine someone telling you: "Of course you can't win with a Mech army in a straight fight, you noob! Use Dropships and Cloaked Banshee's instead!! Stop complaining that you can't win in a straight fight...you're not supposed to, noob!!@"
On July 22 2010 07:11 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: Tech Switches
Unlike other races where you need to build a whole new production facility to make a new set of units such as a factory a stargate, the zerg only needs to wait on a single tech building and then every single hatch/lair/hive can produce that unit.
I can't agree with this. Terrans generally have at least 1 of each of their unit producers already down. This allows them extreme versatility in army make up. If terran decides to tech switch all they need is to simultaneously throw down a couple more unit producers or to build a reactor or two depending on what they are switching to. This can be done just as quickly as a zerg tech switch.
I think zerg tech switches better than protoss, but protoss balances this with a very strong set of gateway units that can defend against almost any threat that they can spawn anywhere and reinforce very quickly.
Zerg has many mechanics that still have not been used to their fullest:
Larva Injection (yes pros still mess this up)
Transfusion strategies
Contamination
Nydus Networks both offensively and defensively
So until this game is released and players get the time to REALLY get their hands on zerg and play with it and experiment then I don't think it's right to really be commenting on how zerg is broken it doesn't work yada yada.
This argument isn't logical. If the problem with Zerg is that people haven't gotten enough time with them yet to perfect Zerg play, then the same point goes for the other races. Following that logic, as players get the time to improve their zerg play, Terran and 'Toss play will improve right along with it leaving them all in the same place they are now at any point along the timeline.
Also, if any race requires "much more focus and apm" to compete than the other 2, that race is by definition underpowered. Even Blizzard states that they consider a certain build or strategy over powered when it easier to perform than it is to counter.
If zerg requires more focus and apm to compete than the other two races, then they are by definition underpowered.
By stating that zerg takes more work to come out victorious is the exact same thing as saying: when two players of equal skill meet, the zerg will always lose.
On July 22 2010 07:15 Takkara wrote: In my humble opinion,
Zerg is fine as a race, they're just unpolished. Their casters are just not finished, spells are added and removed constantly, and they get swapped a bunch. Roaches aren't finished and need some additional tweaks. Corruptors also seems to fall into that unfinished range.
Compare that to Terran where Blizzard has done such an amazing job. I don't think T is overpowered, I think T is the model. Terran is where the races should be when things are "balanced." Every unit is viable (worst is the Reaper), and almost any tech tree has valid strategies around it.
People mistakenly say "lack of diversity" for Zerg. That's not it. They don't necessarily need any more units, they just need the units they all have to be indispensable in some context. Once all the units have a clear and well-defined niche and an appropriate synergy amongst themselves, the race will feel like T and P.
This won't make them any stronger or weaker. It will just make them have more polish. They're the race that's changed the most probably in the beta and still don't feel settled.
I can agree with this
I think T gets the attention first, but they are trying to make it balanced.
Your response is that Zerg should waste money on Nydus, which is fuking terrible. I'm so god damn tired of non-Zerg players telling Zerg players to use Nydus Networks...they're god awful...they take an hour to build and poop out units one at a time to die...you don't see them in high level play because you can't beat a high level player with them!
This is true most of the time. Nydus being the main or one of the main elements in a win are very few and far between. I've done some cute things like use it to flank, but i still lost the majority of my army in beating back my opponent's push. I can reinforce quickly with zerglings, but T and P both have reinforcements that decimate lings. Games where you see nydus winning the game are mostly because the zerg is ahead econ anyway and the T or P refuses to leave a few units in his base to defend. It's easily killed before it pops by stimmed marines or a few zealots/stalkers.
On July 23 2010 08:43 tfmdjeff wrote: These are all reasons why I play Zerg.
I actually have no problems with zerg myself. It isn't underpowered, I feel that it's perfectly balanced, people just aren't playing it properly yet. Zerg as of now is only the macro race. You play it if you love having a huge economy, and being able to pump out units at an unrivaled pace. But i feel like that's the only aspect of Zerg that people are paying attention to. Nydus, contaminate, infested terrans, overlord drop harassment, baneling mines, all sorts of potentially useful strategies are being largely ignored because the current attitude towards the race is "I can win with macro and nothing else".
You are actually very wrong - 1 base zerg can be very powerful you just have to know what dop to with it, and how to transition out if it if you need to.
PS: Nydus is the most OP thing in the game that no one ever exploits.
On July 23 2010 09:08 Bob300 wrote: PS: Nydus is the most OP thing in the game that no one ever exploits.
I invite you to go abuse it; but you won't because you're wrong.
Your post reminded me though...during the last round table (with Day9, Idra, TLO, etc.), TLO claimed that Zerg was not underpowered and Idra challenged him to some matches where Idra said he'd go Terran. I'm patently waiting for those games to be played.
The way Zerg can tech Switche makes them so freaking hard to counter one sec they have a ton of roch then from out of now were they have a ton of zerglings/hyrda/mutas... Zerg in the hands of a progamer is gonna spell murda in a year after the release
On July 23 2010 08:56 Antpile wrote: If zerg requires more focus and apm to compete than the other two races, then they are by definition underpowered.
Terran requires more focus and APM to compete than the other two races in Brood War, and they've been more successful than Protoss or Zerg by far.
Hard to play does not equal imbalanced, people! Geez.
On July 23 2010 09:30 Scorpius wrote: The way Zerg can tech Switche makes them so freaking hard to counter one sec they have a ton of roch then from out of now were they have a ton of zerglings/hyrda/mutas... Zerg in the hands of a progamer is gonna spell murda in a year after the release
So you are saying that us non pro's have to wait beyond a year in order to have a CHANCE at beating a terran?....Makes sense?...Not really
On July 23 2010 09:30 Scorpius wrote: The way Zerg can tech Switche makes them so freaking hard to counter one sec they have a ton of roch then from out of now were they have a ton of zerglings/hyrda/mutas... Zerg in the hands of a progamer is gonna spell murda in a year after the release
So you are saying that us non pro's have to wait beyond a year in order to have a CHANCE at beating a terran?....Makes sense?...Not really
No, he's saying that he has no idea what it's like to play Zerg, but he thinks they're really cool. Also, he left it out, but he thinks Nydus Worms are awesome.
On July 22 2010 07:11 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: Tech Switches
Unlike other races where you need to build a whole new production facility to make a new set of units such as a factory a stargate, the zerg only needs to wait on a single tech building and then every single hatch/lair/hive can produce that unit.
I can't agree with this. Terrans generally have at least 1 of each of their unit producers already down. This allows them extreme versatility in army make up. If terran decides to tech switch all they need is to simultaneously throw down a couple more unit producers or to build a reactor or two depending on what they are switching to. This can be done just as quickly as a zerg tech switch.
I think zerg tech switches better than protoss, but protoss balances this with a very strong set of gateway units that can defend against almost any threat that they can spawn anywhere and reinforce very quickly.
Zerg has many mechanics that still have not been used to their fullest:
Larva Injection (yes pros still mess this up)
Transfusion strategies
Contamination
Nydus Networks both offensively and defensively
So until this game is released and players get the time to REALLY get their hands on zerg and play with it and experiment then I don't think it's right to really be commenting on how zerg is broken it doesn't work yada yada.
This argument isn't logical. If the problem with Zerg is that people haven't gotten enough time with them yet to perfect Zerg play, then the same point goes for the other races. Following that logic, as players get the time to improve their zerg play, Terran and 'Toss play will improve right along with it leaving them all in the same place they are now at any point along the timeline.
Also, if any race requires "much more focus and apm" to compete than the other 2, that race is by definition underpowered. Even Blizzard states that they consider a certain build or strategy over powered when it easier to perform than it is to counter.
If zerg requires more focus and apm to compete than the other two races, then they are by definition underpowered.
By stating that zerg takes more work to come out victorious is the exact same thing as saying: when two players of equal skill meet, the zerg will always lose.
For tech switching, you need to come up with the right definition for "tech switch" in the first place". If tech switch is being able to make one unit now, then a different one in a few seconds, Terran no doubt great at tech switching. A rax can give you 4 different units to make if you have a tech lab, a factory gives you 3 with a tech lab, and a starport gives you 5 with a tech lab, all of which can trade reactors or tech labs with other unit producing structures.
If tech switching means being able to make one type of units IN MASS, and another different type of unit IN MASS, zerg has the advantage. Just by having the tech structure, a zerg can build a bunch of mutas, then hit you hard with a bunch of lings, then go mass roaches with mutas in late game. Not to mention with this ability, zergs and jump from massing T1, T2, and T3 units if they have the tech structures. If a Terran were to go bio and try to go into mech, he'd have 5 - 6 raxs that would be useless and maybe 1 or 2 factories which build thors and tanks extremely slow.
As for your second point about how zerg players should progress equally with Terran and Protoss players, well if people are getting mad about how mech is OP and how Collosi fry their hydras and lings too quickly, or how Terran is the best race and Zergs suck, less people will play zerg and zerg strategies and tactics will develop slower as well.
But logically, I understand you're point and if two people of equal skill fight, the Zerg and his opponent should have a 50/50 chance of winning. It's no doubt that Starcraft 2 still needs some tweaking. Starcraft: Brood War took about 10 years to to become as balanced as it is now, and a great game.
On July 23 2010 08:56 Antpile wrote: If zerg requires more focus and apm to compete than the other two races, then they are by definition underpowered.
Hard to play does not equal imbalanced, people! Geez.
hahahaha. You should think before you post. Let say I set up a tournement to see who can beat a CPU faster SC2. I set one guy's cpu to Easy and set the other guys cpu to insane. How can you not call that unfair or imbalanced? Thats just retarded. One person obviously needs to play significantly better in order to win.
On July 22 2010 07:11 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: Tech Switches
Unlike other races where you need to build a whole new production facility to make a new set of units such as a factory a stargate, the zerg only needs to wait on a single tech building and then every single hatch/lair/hive can produce that unit.
I can't agree with this. Terrans generally have at least 1 of each of their unit producers already down. This allows them extreme versatility in army make up. If terran decides to tech switch all they need is to simultaneously throw down a couple more unit producers or to build a reactor or two depending on what they are switching to. This can be done just as quickly as a zerg tech switch.
I think zerg tech switches better than protoss, but protoss balances this with a very strong set of gateway units that can defend against almost any threat that they can spawn anywhere and reinforce very quickly.
Zerg has many mechanics that still have not been used to their fullest:
Larva Injection (yes pros still mess this up)
Transfusion strategies
Contamination
Nydus Networks both offensively and defensively
So until this game is released and players get the time to REALLY get their hands on zerg and play with it and experiment then I don't think it's right to really be commenting on how zerg is broken it doesn't work yada yada.
This argument isn't logical. If the problem with Zerg is that people haven't gotten enough time with them yet to perfect Zerg play, then the same point goes for the other races. Following that logic, as players get the time to improve their zerg play, Terran and 'Toss play will improve right along with it leaving them all in the same place they are now at any point along the timeline.
Also, if any race requires "much more focus and apm" to compete than the other 2, that race is by definition underpowered. Even Blizzard states that they consider a certain build or strategy over powered when it easier to perform than it is to counter.
If zerg requires more focus and apm to compete than the other two races, then they are by definition underpowered.
By stating that zerg takes more work to come out victorious is the exact same thing as saying: when two players of equal skill meet, the zerg will always lose.
For tech switching, you need to come up with the right definition for "tech switch" in the first place". If tech switch is being able to make one unit now, then a different one in a few seconds, Terran no doubt great at tech switching. A rax can give you 4 different units to make if you have a tech lab, a factory gives you 3 with a tech lab, and a starport gives you 5 with a tech lab, all of which can trade reactors or tech labs with other unit producing structures.
If tech switching means being able to make one type of units IN MASS, and another different type of unit IN MASS, zerg has the advantage. Just by having the tech structure, a zerg can build a bunch of mutas, then hit you hard with a bunch of lings, then go mass roaches with mutas in late game. Not to mention with this ability, zergs and jump from massing T1, T2, and T3 units if they have the tech structures. If a Terran were to go bio and try to go into mech, he'd have 5 - 6 raxs that would be useless and maybe 1 or 2 factories which build thors and tanks extremely slow.
As for your second point about how zerg players should progress equally with Terran and Protoss players, well if people are getting mad about how mech is OP and how Collosi fry their hydras and lings too quickly, or how Terran is the best race and Zergs suck, less people will play zerg and zerg strategies and tactics will develop slower as well.
But logically, I understand you're point and if two people of equal skill fight, the Zerg and his opponent should have a 50/50 chance of winning. It's no doubt that Starcraft 2 still needs some tweaking. Starcraft: Brood War took about 10 years to to become as balanced as it is now, and a great game.
Good post. Zerg players are frustrated mainly because it didn't feel like Blizzard was aggressively tinkering with stuff in the Beta. They spent most of the time on the race buffing Ultra's and tinkering with useless spells. The problems Zerg has now were present months ago, so the idea that SC1 had problems for ten years isn't comforting.
On July 23 2010 08:56 Antpile wrote: If zerg requires more focus and apm to compete than the other two races, then they are by definition underpowered.
Hard to play does not equal imbalanced, people! Geez.
hahahaha. You should think before you post. Let say I set up a tournement to see who can beat a CPU faster SC2. I set one guy's cpu to Easy and set the other guys cpu to insane. How can you not call that unfair or imbalanced? Thats just retarded. One person obviously needs to play significantly better in order to win.
Protoss is easy to play in SC1, Terran is ridiculously hard to play.
Oh, silly me, Protoss has won every single SC1 tournament ever! What an imbalanced game.
On July 23 2010 08:56 Antpile wrote: If zerg requires more focus and apm to compete than the other two races, then they are by definition underpowered.
Terran requires more focus and APM to compete than the other two races in Brood War, and they've been more successful than Protoss or Zerg by far.
Hard to play does not equal imbalanced, people! Geez.
Yes it does, come on think about this for more then 2 seconds. If players of equal skill face Terran wins (more then 50%) because zerg is harder according to you. That is the very definition of imbalance, that an equal matchup does not end in 50/50 due to some factor.
I've read this entire thread and these kinds of reasoning pop up time and time again, people saying they do not agree with zerg being underpowered, just harder. How does that work, imbalance means one must play better to overcome this uneven playing field. People are saying there is no uneven playing field but in the very next sentence say that one must play better / that it is harder for zerg which consitutes imbalance.
On July 23 2010 08:56 Antpile wrote: If zerg requires more focus and apm to compete than the other two races, then they are by definition underpowered.
Terran requires more focus and APM to compete than the other two races in Brood War, and they've been more successful than Protoss or Zerg by far.
Hard to play does not equal imbalanced, people! Geez.
Yes it does, come on think about this for more then 2 seconds. If players of equal skill face Terran wins (more then 50%) because zerg is harder. That is very definition of imbalance, that an equal matchup does not end in 50/50 due to some factor.
Do you have stats that it doesn't end 50/50?
The highest level tourney we've had so far, the 17173 world cup or whatever, had 3 zergs in the semis and one Terran, ZvZ finals. No one gives a shit that low level zergs lose a lot of games. Pros are doing fine with Zerg and that's that.
On July 23 2010 08:56 Antpile wrote: If zerg requires more focus and apm to compete than the other two races, then they are by definition underpowered.
Hard to play does not equal imbalanced, people! Geez.
hahahaha. You should think before you post. Let say I set up a tournement to see who can beat a CPU faster SC2. I set one guy's cpu to Easy and set the other guys cpu to insane. How can you not call that unfair or imbalanced? Thats just retarded. One person obviously needs to play significantly better in order to win.
Protoss is easy to play in SC1, Terran is ridiculously hard to play.
Oh, silly me, Protoss has won every single SC1 tournament ever! What an imbalanced game.
Don't know if I should laugh or cry about this comment. If you can't see how that is imbalance, then you don't want to see it. Or just slightly mentally challenged. I hope for the first one though.
I love how Zerg is becoming the elitist race more and more. Love them or hate them, compared to a well executed game as Zerg, Toss and Terran feel cheap and cheesy at the moment.
On July 23 2010 08:56 Antpile wrote: If zerg requires more focus and apm to compete than the other two races, then they are by definition underpowered.
Hard to play does not equal imbalanced, people! Geez.
hahahaha. You should think before you post. Let say I set up a tournement to see who can beat a CPU faster SC2. I set one guy's cpu to Easy and set the other guys cpu to insane. How can you not call that unfair or imbalanced? Thats just retarded. One person obviously needs to play significantly better in order to win.
Protoss is easy to play in SC1, Terran is ridiculously hard to play.
Oh, silly me, Protoss has won every single SC1 tournament ever! What an imbalanced game.
Don't know if I should laugh or cry about this comment. If you can't see how that is imbalance, then you don't want to see it. Or just slightly mentally challenged. I hope for the first one though.
So you think Protoss is a better race than Terran in SC1 simply because it's easier to play.
The problem is that Zerg units suck. You can tech switch fast to any of them, but they suck Okay, mutalisks and infestors are good, but most of them just aren't as good as they should be.
The problem with zerg is that they need complex creative strategies to beat simple ones. Like Terran a-moving with mech.
On July 23 2010 08:56 Antpile wrote: If zerg requires more focus and apm to compete than the other two races, then they are by definition underpowered.
Terran requires more focus and APM to compete than the other two races in Brood War, and they've been more successful than Protoss or Zerg by far.
Hard to play does not equal imbalanced, people! Geez.
Yes it does, come on think about this for more then 2 seconds. If players of equal skill face Terran wins (more then 50%) because zerg is harder. That is very definition of imbalance, that an equal matchup does not end in 50/50 due to some factor.
Do you have stats that it doesn't end 50/50?
The highest level tourney we've had so far, the 17173 world cup or whatever, had 3 zergs in the semis and one Terran, ZvZ finals. No one gives a shit that low level zergs lose a lot of games. Pros are doing fine with Zerg and that's that.
Do you want to take 2-3 months old statistics while we are it? ^^
Yes the zerg was overpowered when it first came out (or didn't people know how to play against it?, I am starting to wonder???) It is kinda the same thing happening now. If we can't take a look at what is happening right in front of our eyes and just go....It will probably work out. I don't see any problem, I still lose to Zerg, it might have something to do with me being in bronze league.
And seriously, how can people say, when they haven't played a single game with Zerg, that everything is fine. You just need to learn how to play it.
Yeah please go ahead and tell that to dimaga and idra. I am sure they will agree with you ^^
On July 23 2010 08:56 Antpile wrote: If zerg requires more focus and apm to compete than the other two races, then they are by definition underpowered.
Hard to play does not equal imbalanced, people! Geez.
hahahaha. You should think before you post. Let say I set up a tournement to see who can beat a CPU faster SC2. I set one guy's cpu to Easy and set the other guys cpu to insane. How can you not call that unfair or imbalanced? Thats just retarded. One person obviously needs to play significantly better in order to win.
Protoss is easy to play in SC1, Terran is ridiculously hard to play.
Oh, silly me, Protoss has won every single SC1 tournament ever! What an imbalanced game.
Don't know if I should laugh or cry about this comment. If you can't see how that is imbalance, then you don't want to see it. Or just slightly mentally challenged. I hope for the first one though.
So you think Protoss is a better race than Terran in SC1 simply because it's easier to play at the lower levels.
hahahahahahahahaha
I think Protoss at least deserves that much considering the current state of professional Protoss players.
Personally I think that we need time to tell. The difficulty or mechanics of the game may need time to develop and for people to learn how to use them effectively in the different races. At least Raelcun has hit upon some excellent points that make me like Zerg in SC2.
The only thing I dislike about zerg is that it seems their armies are too two-dimensional. When you see Protoss armies and Terran armies they are one big ball and often have several layers of firing units. In Zerg armies, you are lucky if you can get two rows of units (usually roach and hydra). It may have to do with the 'massability' of Zerg, but then again both roaches and hydras cost 2 supply same as stalkers.
On July 23 2010 08:56 Antpile wrote: If zerg requires more focus and apm to compete than the other two races, then they are by definition underpowered.
Terran requires more focus and APM to compete than the other two races in Brood War, and they've been more successful than Protoss or Zerg by far.
Hard to play does not equal imbalanced, people! Geez.
Yes it does, come on think about this for more then 2 seconds. If players of equal skill face Terran wins (more then 50%) because zerg is harder. That is very definition of imbalance, that an equal matchup does not end in 50/50 due to some factor.
Do you have stats that it doesn't end 50/50?
The highest level tourney we've had so far, the 17173 world cup or whatever, had 3 zergs in the semis and one Terran, ZvZ finals. No one gives a shit that low level zergs lose a lot of games. Pros are doing fine with Zerg and that's that.
Look into statistics first of all because 1 tourney says nothing, hell a 100 tourneys say nothing. Come back when you have a 10K sample size and we can start being a little more serious about these examples. That does not happen and every discussion about topics like these are essentially theory craft except for the developer who can access the large sample sizes from ladder. So random examples don't mean shit. Now that i have that out of the way, my main point in that post was point out the logical fallacy people make denying imbalance while they touch upon the very definition for it. The situation is merely hypothetical, and i trust in blizzard to take action as they see fit because they unlike us have the statistics, and we are left to theorycraft and post on forums hoping blizzard sees the general consensus.
edit: and to add my thoughts to this, yes i do think zerg needs a slight change. I started playing zerg because i liked that it is a race which has unusual mechanics and innovative gameplay to me. Having played Zerg some time now coming from random, i am fed up with it. I get this helpless feeling every time i play because i feel powerless to do anything. Next to that i feel zerg getting stale already, which might be due to my limited enjoyment i get because i feel helpless to win mostly.
On July 23 2010 08:56 Antpile wrote: If zerg requires more focus and apm to compete than the other two races, then they are by definition underpowered.
Hard to play does not equal imbalanced, people! Geez.
hahahaha. You should think before you post. Let say I set up a tournement to see who can beat a CPU faster SC2. I set one guy's cpu to Easy and set the other guys cpu to insane. How can you not call that unfair or imbalanced? Thats just retarded. One person obviously needs to play significantly better in order to win.
Protoss is easy to play in SC1, Terran is ridiculously hard to play.
Oh, silly me, Protoss has won every single SC1 tournament ever! What an imbalanced game.
Notice how I didnt quote you on that part just on your comment saying "hard to play does not equal imbalanced" which just makes no sense.
If zerg requires more focus and apm to compete than the other two races, then they are by definition underpowered.
By stating that zerg takes more work to come out victorious is the exact same thing as saying: when two players of equal skill meet, the zerg will always lose.
Actually, if two players played perfect, with no luck involved, the map providing no imbalance to neither race, and one won by a good margin, only then would we have the proof, that the matchup is broken.
One race can be harder, but it could also be that if played perfect, that race is totally overpowered and there's no chance to win, except that it's too hard to perform perfectly, thus making the other seem better.
This being said, i agree all races should have a similar learning curve, skill ceilling, and balance throughout all levels of play, including playing perfectly, which isn't the case, and i agree terran seems to be in favor in most of these aspects. It's indeed very hard to balance this well, but it's blizzard's job to do it, and only time, and tournament results will tell how good of a job they will do.
On July 23 2010 08:43 tfmdjeff wrote: These are all reasons why I play Zerg.
I actually have no problems with zerg myself. It isn't underpowered, I feel that it's perfectly balanced, people just aren't playing it properly yet. Zerg as of now is only the macro race. You play it if you love having a huge economy, and being able to pump out units at an unrivaled pace. But i feel like that's the only aspect of Zerg that people are paying attention to. Nydus, contaminate, infested terrans, overlord drop harassment, baneling mines, all sorts of potentially useful strategies are being largely ignored because the current attitude towards the race is "I can win with macro and nothing else".
Pretty much this, especially the end there. I sometimes feel that Zerg are focusing a bit too much on macro. If we take the most extreme case of this, suppose as a Zerg you had 6 fully saturated bases. Sounds great right? It is until you realize that you are definitely going to lose that game. It takes like ~30 Drones to fully saturate + a queen per each, so that's 192 food invested into economy and thus your pitiful 8 food "army" is going to get owned.
On a more realistic case, suppose you had 3 fully saturated bases. That's "only" 96 food invested in the economy, but it still puts a limit on your maximum fighting force, one that can be exploited by other races that don't have Zerg's expansion rates. If you were fighting say... a 2 base meching Terran, he will have something around 60 SCV's. If you let him max out, his army will be 140 food of meching death vs your 104 or so food... Suffice to say, unless a lot of that is Broodlords or Ultras you will lose no matter how fast you can reinforce.
The point I'm making here is that "macro" in regards to workers/bases can be a double-edged sword. When people say things like "OMG I totally outmacroed him. I had 4-5 bases to his 2 and he owned me even though we had equal food armies!" Well, you lost because you probably had way too many workers and were deceived by the food counts. As such, your actual fighting force was actually significantly smaller than his. For early game, Zerg needs to decide between workers or units in regards to larva. By mid-late game that choice involves not just larva, but the food cap as well.
A good example of this is the Idra vs Tester Game 2.
Idra was at 196 food before the last fight against ~178 of Tester. At the end when he GG's out, his food is at 111 (about 12:47 in the video) despite the fact that all of his units died. Even assuming he had queued up a bunch of units from his hatcheries during the fight, I'd still put his Drone + Queen count somewhere around 90 while Tester probably had ~55-60 Probes for 2 bases. Thus while the food counts would appear to have Idra outnumbering Tester, the actual fight was something like a ~120 food army of Tester vs 106 food from Idra. Add in that Collossi own Hydra/Ling and some excellent Force Field usage, and you have the result of that battle clearly in Tester's favor.
Now perhaps Idra would have lost anyway even if he had the army size advantage due to the fight location, his unit mix, and Tester's great Force Fields. But we'll never know until next time. The advice most often given to Zergs (often against Meching Terrans...) is to "Macro up and take the whole map! Power drones and win via economy!". While this is certainly solid general advice, IMO people don't adequately counterbalance this by adding on "but remember to keep enough food cap space for a big enough army". I'd urge all Zerg players to consider the possibility that there is such a thing as too much macro and that maybe they are guilty of it at times.
Idra at least, has said himself in a recent interview he was thinking of changing to terran, because he felt it's ridiculous how they were (are, since no patches have come out since).
I think some of zergs biggest problems is the idea that the game has to end fast. if people would start thinking of how can I set myself up for a win in the late game. There is so many sweet things you can do as zerg, but you must enjoy some of the finer things in life. Since we have a week of nothing I decided to share some of my replays of some practice games zvt. I will admit pound for pound most of terran units devestate zerg, but thats not zergs powerhouse area. I am diamond, but havnt played many ladder matches in 1s. I am just an old sc1 player I pretty much quit around 2000/01, and you know zerg had alot of trouble as well during SC and in the begining of scbw. Its nothing new just have to expand your game and quit thinking you must end it fast. I could explain some of my views, but that means nothing on paper so if you are bored I posted my replays at the P2 replay section. or follow this link. Some really long epic battles these are just a few of the ones we played because of the patching/deletion of replays not being saved =[ we had played prolly around 40-50 1v1s in the last few days of beta. Enjoy!
On July 23 2010 08:56 Antpile wrote: If zerg requires more focus and apm to compete than the other two races, then they are by definition underpowered.
Terran requires more focus and APM to compete than the other two races in Brood War, and they've been more successful than Protoss or Zerg by far.
Hard to play does not equal imbalanced, people! Geez.
Yes it does, come on think about this for more then 2 seconds. If players of equal skill face Terran wins (more then 50%) because zerg is harder. That is very definition of imbalance, that an equal matchup does not end in 50/50 due to some factor.
Do you have stats that it doesn't end 50/50?
The highest level tourney we've had so far, the 17173 world cup or whatever, had 3 zergs in the semis and one Terran, ZvZ finals. No one gives a shit that low level zergs lose a lot of games. Pros are doing fine with Zerg and that's that.
Use your brain for once. I am tired of reading your idiotic posts. Do you even think before you type? Since the 17173 there has been numerous changes to both races in question. Zergs race has been getting nerfs (Roach/infestor) while terran has been constantly buffs.
Look at the latest zotac results, and other weekly results. Look at the global ladder ranking, Look at the gosumergamers ranking.
On July 23 2010 08:56 Antpile wrote: If zerg requires more focus and apm to compete than the other two races, then they are by definition underpowered.
Terran requires more focus and APM to compete than the other two races in Brood War, and they've been more successful than Protoss or Zerg by far.
Hard to play does not equal imbalanced, people! Geez.
Yes it does, come on think about this for more then 2 seconds. If players of equal skill face Terran wins (more then 50%) because zerg is harder. That is very definition of imbalance, that an equal matchup does not end in 50/50 due to some factor.
Do you have stats that it doesn't end 50/50?
The highest level tourney we've had so far, the 17173 world cup or whatever, had 3 zergs in the semis and one Terran, ZvZ finals. No one gives a shit that low level zergs lose a lot of games. Pros are doing fine with Zerg and that's that.
Use your brain for once, tired of reading your idiotic posts. Do you even think before you type? Since the 17173 there has been numerous changes to both races in question. Zergs race has been getting nerfs (Roach/infestor) while terran has been constantly buffs.
You think Diamond level right now is anywhere near the skill cap? Again, Terran is a hard race in BW, and D/C terrans fail hard on iccup but the top Terran pros can win tons of games.
Again, you have shown no evidence that Zerg's situation in SC2 is any different from Terran's in SC1. Needing more APM and skill to play does not mean worse.
Zerg player here. IMO zerg is the most interesting and most fun to play that if I play other race I just get bored as hell, also PvP and TvT sucks so much to play, while ZvZ is just fine because its fast and intense micro. Zerg is just a little weak in the mid-game. Wish they would increase roach burrow move speed back to what they used to be and move adrenal glands to lair tech and IMO everything would be fine.
Basically, this thread is pointless, since Gold/Plat players complaining about how hard and therefore imba Zerg is is about as pointless as C/D terrans in BW saying Terran is impossible to win with.
If IdrA and Dimaga don't get to the semis of the KotB tournament, then there will definitely be a case that zerg is underpowered, as those are two very good players who can use any race to their full power. Complaints from low-level players should not factor into balance decisions at all though.
On July 23 2010 08:56 Antpile wrote: If zerg requires more focus and apm to compete than the other two races, then they are by definition underpowered.
Terran requires more focus and APM to compete than the other two races in Brood War, and they've been more successful than Protoss or Zerg by far.
Hard to play does not equal imbalanced, people! Geez.
Yes it does, come on think about this for more then 2 seconds. If players of equal skill face Terran wins (more then 50%) because zerg is harder. That is very definition of imbalance, that an equal matchup does not end in 50/50 due to some factor.
Do you have stats that it doesn't end 50/50?
The highest level tourney we've had so far, the 17173 world cup or whatever, had 3 zergs in the semis and one Terran, ZvZ finals. No one gives a shit that low level zergs lose a lot of games. Pros are doing fine with Zerg and that's that.
Tournament results from several patches ago are not relevant.
On July 23 2010 08:56 Antpile wrote: If zerg requires more focus and apm to compete than the other two races, then they are by definition underpowered.
Terran requires more focus and APM to compete than the other two races in Brood War, and they've been more successful than Protoss or Zerg by far.
Hard to play does not equal imbalanced, people! Geez.
Yes it does, come on think about this for more then 2 seconds. If players of equal skill face Terran wins (more then 50%) because zerg is harder. That is very definition of imbalance, that an equal matchup does not end in 50/50 due to some factor.
Do you have stats that it doesn't end 50/50?
The highest level tourney we've had so far, the 17173 world cup or whatever, had 3 zergs in the semis and one Terran, ZvZ finals. No one gives a shit that low level zergs lose a lot of games. Pros are doing fine with Zerg and that's that.
Tournament results from several patches ago are not relevant.
They absolutely are. Zerg has not been completely revamped since then, so arguments that Zerg needs a complete revamp to be competitive are pointless.
On July 23 2010 08:56 Antpile wrote: If zerg requires more focus and apm to compete than the other two races, then they are by definition underpowered.
Terran requires more focus and APM to compete than the other two races in Brood War, and they've been more successful than Protoss or Zerg by far.
Hard to play does not equal imbalanced, people! Geez.
Yes it does, come on think about this for more then 2 seconds. If players of equal skill face Terran wins (more then 50%) because zerg is harder. That is very definition of imbalance, that an equal matchup does not end in 50/50 due to some factor.
Do you have stats that it doesn't end 50/50?
The highest level tourney we've had so far, the 17173 world cup or whatever, had 3 zergs in the semis and one Terran, ZvZ finals. No one gives a shit that low level zergs lose a lot of games. Pros are doing fine with Zerg and that's that.
Tournament results from several patches ago are not relevant.
They absolutely are. Zerg has not been completely revamped since then, so arguments that Zerg needs a complete revamp to be competitive are pointless.
You're a fool. It's not only what has changed for zerg, but what has changed with terran and protoss as well.
On July 23 2010 08:56 Antpile wrote: If zerg requires more focus and apm to compete than the other two races, then they are by definition underpowered.
Terran requires more focus and APM to compete than the other two races in Brood War, and they've been more successful than Protoss or Zerg by far.
Hard to play does not equal imbalanced, people! Geez.
Yes it does, come on think about this for more then 2 seconds. If players of equal skill face Terran wins (more then 50%) because zerg is harder. That is very definition of imbalance, that an equal matchup does not end in 50/50 due to some factor.
Do you have stats that it doesn't end 50/50?
The highest level tourney we've had so far, the 17173 world cup or whatever, had 3 zergs in the semis and one Terran, ZvZ finals. No one gives a shit that low level zergs lose a lot of games. Pros are doing fine with Zerg and that's that.
Tournament results from several patches ago are not relevant.
They absolutely are. Zerg has not been completely revamped since then, so arguments that Zerg needs a complete revamp to be competitive are pointless.
You're a fool. It's not only what has changed for zerg, but what has changed with terran and protoss as well.
The changes made have been relatively small compared to even the patch changes at the beginning of beta. Besides, people were saying "mech is unstoppable" when the 17173 world cup was going on as well.
On July 23 2010 08:56 Antpile wrote: If zerg requires more focus and apm to compete than the other two races, then they are by definition underpowered.
Terran requires more focus and APM to compete than the other two races in Brood War, and they've been more successful than Protoss or Zerg by far.
Hard to play does not equal imbalanced, people! Geez.
Yes it does, come on think about this for more then 2 seconds. If players of equal skill face Terran wins (more then 50%) because zerg is harder. That is very definition of imbalance, that an equal matchup does not end in 50/50 due to some factor.
Do you have stats that it doesn't end 50/50?
The highest level tourney we've had so far, the 17173 world cup or whatever, had 3 zergs in the semis and one Terran, ZvZ finals. No one gives a shit that low level zergs lose a lot of games. Pros are doing fine with Zerg and that's that.
Use your brain for once, tired of reading your idiotic posts. Do you even think before you type? Since the 17173 there has been numerous changes to both races in question. Zergs race has been getting nerfs (Roach/infestor) while terran has been constantly buffs.
You think Diamond level right now is anywhere near the skill cap? Again, Terran is a hard race in BW, and D/C terrans fail hard on iccup but the top Terran pros can win tons of games.
Again, you have shown no evidence that Zerg's situation in SC2 is any different from Terran's in SC1. Needing more APM and skill to play does not mean worse.
Keep on arguing for the sake of arguing/trolling.
LET me explain this to you in simple terms. The only and only reasons Terran seems hard to those D/C players is because of the Terran mechanics (unit production, spells, unit control, etc). Now that is a freaking polar opposite to the Zerg race in SC2. Because A. Zergs don't have many spell casters. B. Unity product is simplified (MBS), and unit control is way easier.
Mechanics is what made Terran hard! Mechanics is extremely simplified in sc2! thus your argument is flawed.
So please don't don't go on comparing two entirely different things on two very different games.
On July 23 2010 08:56 Antpile wrote: If zerg requires more focus and apm to compete than the other two races, then they are by definition underpowered.
Terran requires more focus and APM to compete than the other two races in Brood War, and they've been more successful than Protoss or Zerg by far.
Hard to play does not equal imbalanced, people! Geez.
Yes it does, come on think about this for more then 2 seconds. If players of equal skill face Terran wins (more then 50%) because zerg is harder. That is very definition of imbalance, that an equal matchup does not end in 50/50 due to some factor.
Do you have stats that it doesn't end 50/50?
The highest level tourney we've had so far, the 17173 world cup or whatever, had 3 zergs in the semis and one Terran, ZvZ finals. No one gives a shit that low level zergs lose a lot of games. Pros are doing fine with Zerg and that's that.
Tournament results from several patches ago are not relevant.
They absolutely are. Zerg has not been completely revamped since then, so arguments that Zerg needs a complete revamp to be competitive are pointless.
You're a fool. It's not only what has changed for zerg, but what has changed with terran and protoss as well.
Also what has changed with knowledge of the game and strategies.
Terran were very hard to get into at the start of the beta because of their diverse tech tree. Zerg were very straight forward in comparison (at the start of the beta), as you'd be able to mass units because terran hadn't developed strategies and knowledge of the tech tree.
As terrans learned the most efficient way of playing, they grew increasingly harder to deal with for zerg. They've basically got an infinite amount of openings to choose from. Because of their diversity I'd argue they're still the race with the most unexplored potential.
I just don't see zerg finding any ways of putting pressure on a terran before 8-9 minutes into the game anytime soon.
On July 23 2010 08:56 Antpile wrote: If zerg requires more focus and apm to compete than the other two races, then they are by definition underpowered.
Terran requires more focus and APM to compete than the other two races in Brood War, and they've been more successful than Protoss or Zerg by far.
Hard to play does not equal imbalanced, people! Geez.
Yes it does, come on think about this for more then 2 seconds. If players of equal skill face Terran wins (more then 50%) because zerg is harder. That is very definition of imbalance, that an equal matchup does not end in 50/50 due to some factor.
Do you have stats that it doesn't end 50/50?
The highest level tourney we've had so far, the 17173 world cup or whatever, had 3 zergs in the semis and one Terran, ZvZ finals. No one gives a shit that low level zergs lose a lot of games. Pros are doing fine with Zerg and that's that.
Use your brain for once, tired of reading your idiotic posts. Do you even think before you type? Since the 17173 there has been numerous changes to both races in question. Zergs race has been getting nerfs (Roach/infestor) while terran has been constantly buffs.
You think Diamond level right now is anywhere near the skill cap? Again, Terran is a hard race in BW, and D/C terrans fail hard on iccup but the top Terran pros can win tons of games.
Again, you have shown no evidence that Zerg's situation in SC2 is any different from Terran's in SC1. Needing more APM and skill to play does not mean worse.
Keep on arguing for the sake of arguing/trolling.
LET me explain this to you in simple terms. The only and only reasons Terran seems hard to those D/C players is because of the Terran mechanics (unit production, spells, unit control, etc). Now that is a freaking polar opposite to the Zerg race in SC2. Because A. Zergs don't have many spell casters. B. Unity product is simplified (MBS), and unit control is way easier.
Mechanics is what made Terran hard! Mechanics is extremely simplified in sc2! thus your argument is flawed.
So please don't don't go on comparing two entirely different things on two very different games.
Microing muta/baneling/speedling properly is much harder than microing any unit combination with terran or protoss. With Terran and Protoss I could do reasonably well with massing units and pressing 1a, with Zerg it's impossible to win like that. Also macroing is much less mindless with Zerg since you need to use both creep tumors and larva inject. So yes, there are mechanics in SC2. I can't believe so much time has passed and people are still saying there aren't.
On July 23 2010 11:17 LaLuSh wrote: I just don't see zerg finding any ways of putting pressure on a terran before 8-9 minutes into the game anytime soon.
At least until we see a new map pool that doesn't favor the use of ramps and small chokes.
On July 23 2010 11:17 LaLuSh wrote: I just don't see zerg finding any ways of putting pressure on a terran before 8-9 minutes into the game anytime soon.
At least until we see a new map pool that doesn't favor the use of ramps and small chokes.
The maps are imba? That's ridiculous, everyone knows mech is imba! Remove siege tanks!
On July 23 2010 08:56 Antpile wrote: If zerg requires more focus and apm to compete than the other two races, then they are by definition underpowered.
Terran requires more focus and APM to compete than the other two races in Brood War, and they've been more successful than Protoss or Zerg by far.
Hard to play does not equal imbalanced, people! Geez.
Yes it does, come on think about this for more then 2 seconds. If players of equal skill face Terran wins (more then 50%) because zerg is harder. That is very definition of imbalance, that an equal matchup does not end in 50/50 due to some factor.
Do you have stats that it doesn't end 50/50?
The highest level tourney we've had so far, the 17173 world cup or whatever, had 3 zergs in the semis and one Terran, ZvZ finals. No one gives a shit that low level zergs lose a lot of games. Pros are doing fine with Zerg and that's that.
Use your brain for once, tired of reading your idiotic posts. Do you even think before you type? Since the 17173 there has been numerous changes to both races in question. Zergs race has been getting nerfs (Roach/infestor) while terran has been constantly buffs.
You think Diamond level right now is anywhere near the skill cap? Again, Terran is a hard race in BW, and D/C terrans fail hard on iccup but the top Terran pros can win tons of games.
Again, you have shown no evidence that Zerg's situation in SC2 is any different from Terran's in SC1. Needing more APM and skill to play does not mean worse.
Keep on arguing for the sake of arguing/trolling.
LET me explain this to you in simple terms. The only and only reasons Terran seems hard to those D/C players is because of the Terran mechanics (unit production, spells, unit control, etc). Now that is a freaking polar opposite to the Zerg race in SC2. Because A. Zergs don't have many spell casters. B. Unity product is simplified (MBS), and unit control is way easier.
Mechanics is what made Terran hard! Mechanics is extremely simplified in sc2! thus your argument is flawed.
So please don't don't go on comparing two entirely different things on two very different games.
Microing muta/baneling/speedling properly is much harder than microing any unit combination with terran or protoss. With Terran and Protoss I could do reasonably well with massing units and pressing 1a, with Zerg it's impossible to win like that. Also macroing is much less mindless with Zerg since you need to use both creep tumors and larva inject. So yes, there are mechanics in SC2. I can't believe so much time has passed and people are still saying there aren't.
Are we still arguing this. You are putting words in my mouth. I SAID mechanics is simplified not that it does not exist. And if you think managing low energy is hard then it is pointless talking to you.
ARE you seriously saying the that MBS and unlimited unit selection doesn't make things simpler in terms of mechanics?
LET me ask you this, Why is it if not for mechanics that Terran is hard for low level?
On a side note, I was just browsing through the screenshots on the new battle.net sc2 site, and I realized that nearly every scene featuring zerg show them in a bad situation. What's the deal?
qxc just beat Dimaga so that's a sign something is definitely wrong with TvZ
Are we still arguing this. You are putting words in my mouth. I SAID mechanics is simplified not that it does not exist. And if you think managing low energy is hard then it is pointless talking to you.
ARE you seriously saying the that MBS and unlimited unit selection doesn't make things simpler in terms of mechanics?
Zerg mechanics are still harder than Terran and Protoss. You're not thinking relatively.
Are we still arguing this. You are putting words in my mouth. I SAID mechanics is simplified not that it does not exist. And if you think managing low energy is hard then it is pointless talking to you.
ARE you seriously saying the that MBS and unlimited unit selection doesn't make things simpler in terms of mechanics?
Zerg mechanics are still harder than Terran and Protoss. You're not thinking relatively.
People are too dumb to realize these things. They live in their own little world, and seem to play a different sc2 than the rest of us.
qxc just beat Dimaga so that's a sign something is definitely wrong with TvZ
Are we still arguing this. You are putting words in my mouth. I SAID mechanics is simplified not that it does not exist. And if you think managing low energy is hard then it is pointless talking to you.
ARE you seriously saying the that MBS and unlimited unit selection doesn't make things simpler in terms of mechanics?
Zerg mechanics are still harder than Terran and Protoss. You're not thinking relatively.
People are too dumb to realize these things. They live in their own little world, and seem to play a different sc2 than the rest of us.
Calm down your being hypocritical at this point, any time you feel someone is dumb for not feeling the same way you do your living in your own little world buddy. Hate to break it to you in such a fashion but you need to let it go, whether the race feels broken to you or not isn't going to change someone elses personal experience.
Are we still arguing this. You are putting words in my mouth. I SAID mechanics is simplified not that it does not exist. And if you think managing low energy is hard then it is pointless talking to you.
ARE you seriously saying the that MBS and unlimited unit selection doesn't make things simpler in terms of mechanics?
Zerg mechanics are still harder than Terran and Protoss. You're not thinking relatively.
Are you even capable of understanding an argument?
It doesn't matter if Zerg mechanics are relatively harder compared to Protoss/Terran in SC2 (debatle), The point is that it is still no where near as demanding as the pure mechanics/limitations of SC1. This explains why Terran had to master the fundamentally hard mechanics to compete with their counterparts at the lower level ICCUP.
So you are saying all these people are complaining because they can't manage their queen energy? or spew lava? Do you even think before you type?
Like I have already pointed out you can't compare two inherit opposite race in two entirely different games.
It doesn't matter if Zerg mechanics are relatively harder compared to Protoss/Terran in SC2 (debatle
Yes it does that's the whole point. The learning curve is harder so Zergs aren't as good right now. Again, a recent result has convinced me that ZvT does need to be tweaked in favor of Z, but Zerg mechanics are definitely harder.
Macro: with P or T you can group all your CCs/nexuses together and there's your macro mechanic. With Z you have double the macro mechanics if you want to have additional larva at each hatchery and creep all over the map.
Micro: with P or T you can do ok with using 1a, with Z you need to flank, split banelings, control mutas, burrow roaches, micro infestors (and very few zergs have been doing all those things). There's no ball of death for Zerg, not even close.
Also, I don't understand why you're trying to derail this thread into a flamewar.
So you are saying all these people are complaining because they can't manage their queen energy? or spew lava? Do you even think before you type?
I've only seen Idra and TLO cover the map with creep tumors while getting maximum larva. And so many zergs have been using a 1a blob of death it's not even funny.
Mechanics may be harder, but not by a lot as there are balancing issues that make it easier such as unit production. Honestly, just give me a way to put early pressure on my opponent that isn't an all in strategy and I would be happy. It is so incredibly easy to block your incredibly small ramps AND Zerg is the only race that doesn't have a unit that can abuse Terrain.
Just one of these tweaks would help. Change the map pool, let me upgrade Roach speed right away or even moving burrow back to hatchery tech would actually help a lot. Now I can hide lings outside your base for a surprise attack when you move out giving me a better shot at early map control or running through your blockade. It is just SO easy to sit back and play D versus Zerg for both Terran and Protoss.
Also, in SC1, when a Zerg took an FE, he had a significant advantage if his opponent didn't expand soon after or hit his economy. Now, an FE just barely keeps a Zerg above his opponent. Zerg are often forced to gamble on an expansion just to keep even with the drone count and that just doesn't feel quite right to me.
Playing SC1 Zerg, they seem infinitely more massive. Just far more of a swarm. 150/200 on SC1 seems 2X larger than 200/200 on SC2.
That aside, I like the Units a lot... good artwork... even the sound has greatly improved. Just not the same swarm that is going to overwhelm you with ridiculous 4 to 1 numbers like in SC1. Seems like, in terms of population, they are on almost equal footing now with Protoss and Terran.
Mechanically, and strategically, though... I have the most respect for Zerg players. I could not play Zerg to the level that I could fake Terran or Protoss. I am sure of that. So Kudos to you guys.
Are we still arguing this. You are putting words in my mouth. I SAID mechanics is simplified not that it does not exist. And if you think managing low energy is hard then it is pointless talking to you.
ARE you seriously saying the that MBS and unlimited unit selection doesn't make things simpler in terms of mechanics?
Zerg mechanics are still harder than Terran and Protoss. You're not thinking relatively.
Crazy talk. Zerg mechanics are incredibly simple / easy. Terran is by far the hardest mechanics wise. I don't think Z is easier to play, but mechanics wise they are.
On July 22 2010 07:11 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: Tech Switches
Unlike other races where you need to build a whole new production facility to make a new set of units such as a factory a stargate, the zerg only needs to wait on a single tech building and then every single hatch/lair/hive can produce that unit.
I can't agree with this. Terrans generally have at least 1 of each of their unit producers already down. This allows them extreme versatility in army make up. If terran decides to tech switch all they need is to simultaneously throw down a couple more unit producers or to build a reactor or two depending on what they are switching to. This can be done just as quickly as a zerg tech switch.
I think zerg tech switches better than protoss, but protoss balances this with a very strong set of gateway units that can defend against almost any threat that they can spawn anywhere and reinforce very quickly.
Zerg has many mechanics that still have not been used to their fullest:
Larva Injection (yes pros still mess this up)
Transfusion strategies
Contamination
Nydus Networks both offensively and defensively
So until this game is released and players get the time to REALLY get their hands on zerg and play with it and experiment then I don't think it's right to really be commenting on how zerg is broken it doesn't work yada yada.
This argument isn't logical. If the problem with Zerg is that people haven't gotten enough time with them yet to perfect Zerg play, then the same point goes for the other races. Following that logic, as players get the time to improve their zerg play, Terran and 'Toss play will improve right along with it leaving them all in the same place they are now at any point along the timeline.
Also, if any race requires "much more focus and apm" to compete than the other 2, that race is by definition underpowered. Even Blizzard states that they consider a certain build or strategy over powered when it easier to perform than it is to counter.
If zerg requires more focus and apm to compete than the other two races, then they are by definition underpowered.
By stating that zerg takes more work to come out victorious is the exact same thing as saying: when two players of equal skill meet, the zerg will always lose.
For tech switching, you need to come up with the right definition for "tech switch" in the first place". If tech switch is being able to make one unit now, then a different one in a few seconds, Terran no doubt great at tech switching. A rax can give you 4 different units to make if you have a tech lab, a factory gives you 3 with a tech lab, and a starport gives you 5 with a tech lab, all of which can trade reactors or tech labs with other unit producing structures.
If tech switching means being able to make one type of units IN MASS, and another different type of unit IN MASS, zerg has the advantage. Just by having the tech structure, a zerg can build a bunch of mutas, then hit you hard with a bunch of lings, then go mass roaches with mutas in late game. Not to mention with this ability, zergs and jump from massing T1, T2, and T3 units if they have the tech structures. If a Terran were to go bio and try to go into mech, he'd have 5 - 6 raxs that would be useless and maybe 1 or 2 factories which build thors and tanks extremely slow.
As for your second point about how zerg players should progress equally with Terran and Protoss players, well if people are getting mad about how mech is OP and how Collosi fry their hydras and lings too quickly, or how Terran is the best race and Zergs suck, less people will play zerg and zerg strategies and tactics will develop slower as well.
But logically, I understand you're point and if two people of equal skill fight, the Zerg and his opponent should have a 50/50 chance of winning. It's no doubt that Starcraft 2 still needs some tweaking. Starcraft: Brood War took about 10 years to to become as balanced as it is now, and a great game.
My notion of what a tech switch is is producing a unit (ex ling) and the opponent bringing out their tech (obviously strong against ling) and you switch to producing the unit that beats their composition; For example, Z builds a Roach based army and sees immortals and tech switches to hydras or w/e (can be after a game or can be through scouting and showing your suprise tech before the game).
Examples of play from P and T that are strong plays in general are 4 gate w/ gas and 1/1/1 build. The strongest thing that Z has to compare is 13gas 14 pool into quick hatch and heavily out macro the opponent. The 4 gate and the 1/1/1 are going to have better timing attacks and will lead up to an army composition that is stronger in the late game as well. Zergs best play right now is probably 2 hatch muta because it fights P and T in ways that are subtle (making them turtle) but unless the zerg completely outplays the opp their army will be worse. Another thing that has an impact on the game is T/P have an easy way of walling off where Z doesn't really have a way. This means that Z should be the aggressor but their best gameplan is being macro oriented (the 2 don't have much of an affinity).
On July 23 2010 10:51 jalstar wrote: Basically, this thread is pointless, since Gold/Plat players complaining about how hard and therefore imba Zerg is is about as pointless as C/D terrans in BW saying Terran is impossible to win with.
If IdrA and Dimaga don't get to the semis of the KotB tournament, then there will definitely be a case that zerg is underpowered, as those are two very good players who can use any race to their full power. Complaints from low-level players should not factor into balance decisions at all though.
I don't agree with you at all about this thread being pointless. Raelcun is right on most points. Zerg tech switches and unit production easily out matches P and T if they have expanded correctly.
Actually. the only point I dont agree with him about are the nydus worms. yeah.. it's cool having units transported from on end of the map to the other.. but the problem is build time for th enydus.. the scream.. then the time it takes to individually unload one unit at a time for it to be effective as a defensive or offensive worm. Spreading creep early game is a must, however. A lot of lower level zergs keep spreading creep early game and have no way of utilizing those larvae while the higher level players spread creep and give their armies a good advantage of surrounding for pushes.
TBH the only problem I have with zerg (being a zerg player) is the tank UI and the slow drop on the nydus worms. ZvP seems like a pretty balanced matchup (maybe a few and i mean FEW tweaks and it'd be pretty good) while ZvT mech seems a bit OP (not saying it' snot unbeatable.. but at current point in time it's pretty hard to counter with less than 150 apm ((multiple drops)).
Say what you will about my post.. but most of it seems like a valid argument.
i do think SC2 will become 'the' or one of the greatest games ever developed. So far so good since most of the blanace came in BETA! Gogo blizzard.
Zerg is only bad for bad players really. The difference is that the macro ability is much more punishing to these bad players than terran or protoss abilities. If you don't like it then don't play zerg duh.
But at high/pro level zerg is not underpowered at all. Thus, Z is not underpowered period.
For the love of god people, can you use spoilers if you are going to spoil tournament results, any tournament. I haven't watched the latest king of the beta games yet because I actually have to sleep so I have been avoiding that thread in fear of spoilers. And the Day9daily thread. Then I open this one and the first thing I see is spoiler for the QXC vs Dimaga games, eh?
It isn't so hard and it makes slowpookes like me happy so please, I beg of you to use spoilers
On July 23 2010 06:59 Deckkie wrote: About the Tech switch I think its a very big advantage. Think about the ZvP game from the King of the Beta (think it was IdrA vs Huk ... not sure) toss came with mass Collosis, and the Zerg could counter it relatively easy with Corrupters, because Zerg can tech-switch super fast. A terran or Protoss would have had much more problems with it. Also When a Zerg player looses drones, he can make ten new ones in a blink. Terran and Toss need to make them one by one. Conclusion Tech switch big advantage
You really haven't thought through anything in your post.
If you're Terran, you likely have a Starport regardless of strategy...if it's MMM, fast banshee, Ravens in Mech, etc. Terran see a Colossus, immediately swap their Starport to a Reactor and start pumping out double Vikings. Zerg, oppositely, can't get all their tech buildings in advance (for obvious reasons), so when Zerg sees a Colossus, they have to build a Spire, which takes roughly 17 minutes, and then change all their unit production into Corrupters, which are completely useless against the rest of the Protoss army and twice the cost of a Viking (the only reason Zerg players make Corrupters is lack of alternatives...they're a terrible unit). That you think Zerg can react and counter a Colossus faster than Terran is ridiculous. And that doesn't even include the point that Colossus don't hard counter all Terran ground like they do with Zerg, meaning unlike Zerg, Terran have several options of response.
You're point about replacing Drones ten at a time isn't an inherent advantage as it costs larvae, meaning that you can't be fortifying your army. I find it amazing how Non-Zerg players view Zerg through rose-colored glasses in nearly every discussion.
Yes your right, I did see Zerg through rose glasses, and have been told couple of times already how wrong I am, and Im sorry for that. But I do also think you might see terran through rose glasses as well. Terran has both factory's, raxes, and starports. and they have to build from all three of them. as terran you can not say: ohh I need some vickings lets first make ten off those and then ill go on with making bio/mech. And I have a question abut that (since I clearly dont know enough about Zerg) : dont you always tech to anti air in a basic build? or does that really weaken your ground army tech to much??
On July 23 2010 17:20 Salteador Neo wrote: Zerg is only bad for bad players really. The difference is that the macro ability is much more punishing to these bad players than terran or protoss abilities. If you don't like it then don't play zerg duh.
But at high/pro level zerg is not underpowered at all. Thus, Z is not underpowered period.
Balancing a game only around pro level is not good enough. SC2 will be solds to millions of people, then only around 100 people should enjoy a balanced game? Remember who gives money to Blizzard for developing the game (hint: not the 100 pro people).
And I've yet to see a high level Zerg. Idra seems to get beaten by pretty simple Terran tactics, so he can't be high level.
On July 23 2010 17:20 Salteador Neo wrote: Zerg is only bad for bad players really. The difference is that the macro ability is much more punishing to these bad players than terran or protoss abilities. If you don't like it then don't play zerg duh.
But at high/pro level zerg is not underpowered at all. Thus, Z is not underpowered period.
Balancing a game only around pro level is not good enough. SC2 will be solds to millions of people, then only around 100 people should enjoy a balanced game? Remember who gives money to Blizzard for developing the game (hint: not the 100 pro people).
And I've yet to see a high level Zerg. Idra seems to get beaten by pretty simple Terran tactics, so he can't be high level.
:D made at least me laugh.
But I disagree, I think the game should be balanced around pro's and we lower tier players should just learn to play better.
To me balancing isn't making something viable against something only if you have Flash's or Jaedong's apm, when the other player can use only his right hand be ok. So if everything is equally balanced for every race and for pro's, we will catch up eventually.
Plus I have seen a lot of lower tier terran's getting destroyed when using mech just because they just push into zergs base and start sieging when the battle is already going on and then they complain how crap mech is.
So no, please don't balance the game around lower tier players.
Need to see what new maps come out. With maps the way they are allowing terran and protoss to wall off it really hurts zerg harrass... which is what makes the zerg strong. Without that option it isn't really showing how balanced the zerg can be on an open map.
Take away terrans 2-3 building wall and I think zerg would almost need a nerf to prevent harrassment. Especially in the early game.
On July 23 2010 17:20 Salteador Neo wrote: Zerg is only bad for bad players really. The difference is that the macro ability is much more punishing to these bad players than terran or protoss abilities. If you don't like it then don't play zerg duh.
But at high/pro level zerg is not underpowered at all. Thus, Z is not underpowered period.
Balancing a game only around pro level is not good enough. SC2 will be solds to millions of people, then only around 100 people should enjoy a balanced game? Remember who gives money to Blizzard for developing the game (hint: not the 100 pro people).
And I've yet to see a high level Zerg. Idra seems to get beaten by pretty simple Terran tactics, so he can't be high level.
Well I didn't say it is fair. But I guess it's impossible to have the three races perfectly balanced at both low and high level of play. And if I have to choose, then it must be balanced at high level of course. Noobies can always learn to play better. Pros cannot become worse for the sake of balance xd
On July 23 2010 06:59 Deckkie wrote: About the Tech switch I think its a very big advantage. Think about the ZvP game from the King of the Beta (think it was IdrA vs Huk ... not sure) toss came with mass Collosis, and the Zerg could counter it relatively easy with Corrupters, because Zerg can tech-switch super fast. A terran or Protoss would have had much more problems with it. Also When a Zerg player looses drones, he can make ten new ones in a blink. Terran and Toss need to make them one by one. Conclusion Tech switch big advantage
You really haven't thought through anything in your post.
If you're Terran, you likely have a Starport regardless of strategy...if it's MMM, fast banshee, Ravens in Mech, etc. Terran see a Colossus, immediately swap their Starport to a Reactor and start pumping out double Vikings. Zerg, oppositely, can't get all their tech buildings in advance (for obvious reasons), so when Zerg sees a Colossus, they have to build a Spire, which takes roughly 17 minutes, and then change all their unit production into Corrupters, which are completely useless against the rest of the Protoss army and twice the cost of a Viking (the only reason Zerg players make Corrupters is lack of alternatives...they're a terrible unit). That you think Zerg can react and counter a Colossus faster than Terran is ridiculous. And that doesn't even include the point that Colossus don't hard counter all Terran ground like they do with Zerg, meaning unlike Zerg, Terran have several options of response.
You're point about replacing Drones ten at a time isn't an inherent advantage as it costs larvae, meaning that you can't be fortifying your army. I find it amazing how Non-Zerg players view Zerg through rose-colored glasses in nearly every discussion.
Yes your right, I did see Zerg through rose glasses, and have been told couple of times already how wrong I am, and Im sorry for that. But I do also think you might see terran through rose glasses as well. Terran has both factory's, raxes, and starports. and they have to build from all three of them. as terran you can not say: ohh I need some vickings lets first make ten off those and then ill go on with making bio/mech. And I have a question abut that (since I clearly dont know enough about Zerg) : dont you always tech to anti air in a basic build? or does that really weaken your ground army tech to much??
They can switch that reactor to the starport and start pumping them out 2 at a time, though, people seems to far underestimate the power of reactors when it comes to medivac, marine, viking and hellion production.
We all have queens, yeah. But honestly, no, you don't always get AA in your build. Consider this, you need 100 gas for speed, 100 for lair, 100 for ovie speed if you want any intel. Now add in roach upgrades and unit upgrades. These gas hurt, and these are gas you want to be spending rightaway. The 200 gas for spire hurts a ton, nevermind the 100gas per mute part. The gas+upgrade for hydra hurts greatly too. Besides, few Ts would go banshees without cloak, and as Z, if you can scout anything ahead of time, you'd really only see a starport + tech lab. Oh, sure, if the T is staying on one base it'd most likely be banshees, so you spend 100gas on overseer at least. Then let's consider how a Z's best hope at a late game situation is tier 3, and given the gas consuming nature of ultras/broodlords, you want to hoard up gas and start infestation pit/hive relatively early...all these gas adds up, and if you want to be in a position to match T at all, you will be cutting corners.
AA is one of the easiest one to skip given the power of queens. As to how effective that is? Well, it depends. 3 queens can take out a lot of stuff, and a number of Ts would hold off on using air just because Zs have been opting for extra queens. Then there are some Ts that up the ante and make more banshees - after all, they are excellent anti-ground DPS no matter what. Then one little loss of attention, you lose a queen, and what would've been a winnable fight becomes impossible. Honestly, having played T for a while, barring situations where I just try to skimp on turrets completely I have never felt as helpless as I did as Z. Where I can play safe with T and sit on one base with decent econ for a while, it is completely impossible with Z even with larva injection. I don't know if this means anything like imbalance, but I certainly feel that Zerg in SC2 has been placed into a particularly reactive position.
On July 23 2010 20:33 Bobgrimly wrote: Need to see what new maps come out. With maps the way they are allowing terran and protoss to wall off it really hurts zerg harrass... which is what makes the zerg strong. Without that option it isn't really showing how balanced the zerg can be on an open map.
Take away terrans 2-3 building wall and I think zerg would almost need a nerf to prevent harrassment. Especially in the early game.
Scrap station? Even if they make the distance shorter, something like that isn't too amazingly hard to defend. Show a Z 2 bunkers and that Z will back off, and all you lose is a slight bit of time for that 200 minerals. Short rush distances might be a boom for ZvT, but for ZvP it is almost certain to be a huge issue with the power that 2gate has been displaying in the matchup. I really feel like Z's harassment ability isn't just hurt by the ability for other races to wall in, but the speed at which they can match Z's production while maintaining a decent economy.
As I see it, supposing relatively even knowledge of the units (including the opposition) there is a difference in the useful APM (not talking about spamming a rally point) to get to a certain level.
For example, on an arbitrary scale from 1-10 (where 10 is the high end, so a 10 player would beat a 9 regularly) I think it is something like this:
APM Terran Protoss Zerg
30 4 3 2
60 6 5 4
90 7 7 5.5
120 8 8 7
150+ 9 9 9
And if it turns out like broodwars as I recall some korean with zerg will hit 10 because there is more to do with a high APM (larva, creep tumors, mad zergling/muta micro).
As it is though a majority of the players are running in the 60 ish range (or probably 90-120 for people here) and that is where there is an imbalance because Terran can 1a2a or stair step at lower levels whereas missing some muta micro, even at a high level can lose you a game.
Just look at Dimaga vs QXC game 1, 1 missclick and no more mutas.
Terran can also have a simple build order which is essentially immune to rushes, cutting out the possibility of making any early big mistakes (whereas a Zerg player who can't wall off has to always have good scouting and balance the macro/micro because the Terran or Protoss player will invariably dictate the pace of the early game).
Thanks Raelcun for this excellent write-up. I've found nothing in here that I haven't said before in zerg QQ threads and it's nice to see it all in one place.
I think Zerg is a blast to play because of all the constant scouting you need to do to know when to switch form powering drones to making military units. You never get a chance to go "well, this is a macro game right now so I can just sit back and chill for a moment"
That being said, Zerg are just straight up boring to watch. I think this comes from the infancy of the game but there just seems to be so few micro opportunities for zerg to make battles more interesting then blob vs blob. Seeing roaches burrow to avoid damage mid battle is extremely uncommon, as is seeing things like zerg players pulling units back to avoid damage. It just makes the race seem dull from a spectators perspective but I feel that will change as people get more experience with the race.
Zerg is a lot of fun to play for me at least, but it is definitely the least forgiving race. P and T can counter the zerg's (non-diverse) unit composition, they have much more options for early and mid game harassment, they have OP AtG air units (void and bancheese), they can skimp on army early and power by doing a simple wall off, and they have the more powerful late game armies, and they can tech to T3 faster than zerg.
I just see too many situations where the zerg are way more vulnerable than other races, and unlike broodwar we don't have any amazing spell casters to use as our trump card.
On July 23 2010 17:20 Salteador Neo wrote: Zerg is only bad for bad players really. The difference is that the macro ability is much more punishing to these bad players than terran or protoss abilities. If you don't like it then don't play zerg duh.
But at high/pro level zerg is not underpowered at all. Thus, Z is not underpowered period.
Troll successful.
It's totally all the bronze and silver players complaining about TvZ ^_^
On July 23 2010 21:57 STS17 wrote: Thanks Raelcun for this excellent write-up. I've found nothing in here that I haven't said before in zerg QQ threads and it's nice to see it all in one place.
I think Zerg is a blast to play because of all the constant scouting you need to do to know when to switch form powering drones to making military units. You never get a chance to go "well, this is a macro game right now so I can just sit back and chill for a moment"
That being said, Zerg are just straight up boring to watch. I think this comes from the infancy of the game but there just seems to be so few micro opportunities for zerg to make battles more interesting then blob vs blob. Seeing roaches burrow to avoid damage mid battle is extremely uncommon, as is seeing things like zerg players pulling units back to avoid damage. It just makes the race seem dull from a spectators perspective but I feel that will change as people get more experience with the race.
Yeah, Zerg are definetely a lot more fun to play than they are to watch.
On July 23 2010 21:57 STS17 wrote:That being said, Zerg are just straight up boring to watch. I think this comes from the infancy of the game but there just seems to be so few micro opportunities for zerg to make battles more interesting then blob vs blob. Seeing roaches burrow to avoid damage mid battle is extremely uncommon, as is seeing things like zerg players pulling units back to avoid damage. It just makes the race seem dull from a spectators perspective but I feel that will change as people get more experience with the race.
Well, ball vs ball sucks for the zerg every time, so obviously thats a big problem right there. But we will see some smarter positioning, flanking and so on once we go live.
I'd recommend watching some of those WTA vids off gomtv, there are some games with really sweet battles. Korean tho, can be a PITA :D
People reasoned that Zerg dominated early in phase 1 in Asia because:
1. Many SC1 pros were playing Zerg, so the caliber of player was higher. 2. The lack of unit diversity allowed Zerg players to become more familiar with their race faster. This seems logical: if there are less unit combinations to learn, one should be able to master all of them faster.
Now, people are saying that Zerg aren't high caliber anymore. People are saying we should wait until well into release so people can get familiar enough with Zerg to see some "smarter positioning, flanking and so on."
Does anybody else see the disconnect here?
What's interesting to me is that Zerg players somehow lost their skill and knowledge of their race around roughly the same time as the massive mech buffs and the roach nerf.
Personally, from a mostly platinum (and briefly diamond) Protoss perspective (but I enjoyed dabbling with T and Z), PvZ and ZvZ make sense. There's a logic to the back-and-forth. You can understand why each player is building what they're building (e.g. in PvZ, roaches to counter zealots, stalkers to counter roaches, hydras to counter stalkers, colossus to counter hydras, corruptors to counter colossus, more stalkers + thermal lance to counter corrupters, ultralisks to punish lack of immortal support for the stalker ball, etc.). I don't see the logic in ZvT, since it seems like there aren't really any clear counters in the Zerg arsenal for what Terran can throw at them early on (save banelings for masses of marines). Put differently, Zerg doesn't choose the best units for dealing with Terran's army composition -- Zerg chooses the units that suck the least against it.
From my limited ZvT experience, it seems like the Zerg player, from the outset, is at a disadvantage. Effective scouting, which is necessary for Z success, is easily frustrated until Lair tech with a decent wall-off (reactors and tech labs only give away so much, and you can only see what's at the choke without saccing a slow ovie).
The most frustration comes with the fact that Terran mech seems to hard counter all Zerg T1 and T2, and Terran can start to access mech tech (hellion harass, tanks) faster and safer than Zerg can reach T2 (reasonably). Harassment, due to the wall-off, must be mutalisks or some sort of baneling bust. Without harassment, Zerg can't tech to effective answers to mech (T3), because the push will arrive too soon. In some scenarios, they can abuse gimmicks that work about once per game to buy time (like roach burrow, baneling drops, doomdrops, nydus play, mutalisk harass, all of the above simultaneously, etc.). If the harassment fails at any point along the road to T3, Zerg loses to the early push. If T successfully harasses back on the road to T3 and slows down T3 tech, Zerg won't reach their response in time for T's push. If Zerg fails to out-expand Terran (WHILE teching to T3 and constantly harassing to contain T), Zerg will probably lose because it needs so much gas to fuel its T3 answers.
The best part is that T3 doesn't guarantee the win for Zerg -- it only guarantees a fighting chance against Terran's very robust T2. Not only that, but even the gimmicky stalling tactics can backfire -- a lucky scan or good marine micro can severely reduce the effectiveness of roaches, baneling drops and mutalisk harassment. You're basically hoping that the Terran looked away from his forces for a moment while you hit him.
But hey, I'm no pro. I just don't see how Zerg can effectively fight Terran with T2 forces. Maybe the answer is heavier Infestor play to stall for T3, like TLO's Infestor/Ling/Ultra? If that's the case, then why did Blizzard nerf Neural Parasite to 12 seconds? It seems like the deck is stacked against Zerg at the moment.
It's one thing to make threads about how zerg are fine, but recognize that there are no threads from terran players about having trouble with Zerg. Is it because terran players are less whiney, or use smarter tactics, or are just plain better? Look at this matchup from terran's perspective- it's very straight forward, many ways to win, and if you lose you know why- you made some pretty big mistakes or got completely out macroed/out-played.
As far as what the zerg can throw at you, early ling run-bys are completely negated by a basic wall-off. Baneling bust is completely negated by double rax wall off and a single siege tank. Mutas are completely shut down by a few turrets and marines, or if you are really worried a thor or two. Drops/nydus are the next threat, but terrans are usually turtling before they make their huge push so units are nearby to stop it. If the game goes longer and zerg is able to tech up to t2.5/3, a zerg player may be throwing NP at you, or ultras, or brood lords, but these are all countered HARD by tanks, thors, and vikings (all T2). Basically, terran can be reasonably comfortable from start to finish no matter what zerg throws at them, and every TvZ is their game to lose.
On July 24 2010 02:49 Toxigen wrote: Now, people are saying that Zerg aren't high caliber anymore. People are saying we should wait until well into release so people can get familiar enough with Zerg to see some "smarter positioning, flanking and so on."
I totally agree with your post, but mine was simply a reply to the claim that zerg are boring to watch - blob vs blob battles. We already have massive fragile units, blob vs blob reduces their efficiency even further. Playing with those deeper positioning tactics definately makes the units more efficient and more interesting to watch.
I do hope thats not all we can do to stay alive tho
On July 23 2010 17:20 Salteador Neo wrote: Zerg is only bad for bad players really. The difference is that the macro ability is much more punishing to these bad players than terran or protoss abilities. If you don't like it then don't play zerg duh.
But at high/pro level zerg is not underpowered at all. Thus, Z is not underpowered period.
Troll successful.
It's totally all the bronze and silver players complaining about TvZ ^_^
Pretty sure most of them think the problem of that is in the terran part (tanks), not in the zerg being underpowered.
I want to see open maps. I want to see terran and protoss without the ability to wall off.
I don't care about sim city. I just don't want them to have the option I don't have. They can walk to my mineral line.... give me a map that prevents them from stopping me from doing the same thing without a massive sim city.
On July 23 2010 08:43 tfmdjeff wrote: These are all reasons why I play Zerg.
I actually have no problems with zerg myself. It isn't underpowered, I feel that it's perfectly balanced, people just aren't playing it properly yet. Zerg as of now is only the macro race. You play it if you love having a huge economy, and being able to pump out units at an unrivaled pace. But i feel like that's the only aspect of Zerg that people are paying attention to. Nydus, contaminate, infested terrans, overlord drop harassment, baneling mines, all sorts of potentially useful strategies are being largely ignored because the current attitude towards the race is "I can win with macro and nothing else".
Pretty much this, especially the end there. I sometimes feel that Zerg are focusing a bit too much on macro. If we take the most extreme case of this, suppose as a Zerg you had 6 fully saturated bases. Sounds great right? It is until you realize that you are definitely going to lose that game. It takes like ~30 Drones to fully saturate + a queen per each, so that's 192 food invested into economy and thus your pitiful 8 food "army" is going to get owned.
On a more realistic case, suppose you had 3 fully saturated bases. That's "only" 96 food invested in the economy, but it still puts a limit on your maximum fighting force, one that can be exploited by other races that don't have Zerg's expansion rates. If you were fighting say... a 2 base meching Terran, he will have something around 60 SCV's. If you let him max out, his army will be 140 food of meching death vs your 104 or so food... Suffice to say, unless a lot of that is Broodlords or Ultras you will lose no matter how fast you can reinforce.
The point I'm making here is that "macro" in regards to workers/bases can be a double-edged sword. When people say things like "OMG I totally outmacroed him. I had 4-5 bases to his 2 and he owned me even though we had equal food armies!" Well, you lost because you probably had way too many workers and were deceived by the food counts. As such, your actual fighting force was actually significantly smaller than his. For early game, Zerg needs to decide between workers or units in regards to larva. By mid-late game that choice involves not just larva, but the food cap as well.
A good example of this is the Idra vs Tester Game 2.
Idra was at 196 food before the last fight against ~178 of Tester. At the end when he GG's out, his food is at 111 (about 12:47 in the video) despite the fact that all of his units died. Even assuming he had queued up a bunch of units from his hatcheries during the fight, I'd still put his Drone + Queen count somewhere around 90 while Tester probably had ~55-60 Probes for 2 bases. Thus while the food counts would appear to have Idra outnumbering Tester, the actual fight was something like a ~120 food army of Tester vs 106 food from Idra. Add in that Collossi own Hydra/Ling and some excellent Force Field usage, and you have the result of that battle clearly in Tester's favor.
Now perhaps Idra would have lost anyway even if he had the army size advantage due to the fight location, his unit mix, and Tester's great Force Fields. But we'll never know until next time. The advice most often given to Zergs (often against Meching Terrans...) is to "Macro up and take the whole map! Power drones and win via economy!". While this is certainly solid general advice, IMO people don't adequately counterbalance this by adding on "but remember to keep enough food cap space for a big enough army". I'd urge all Zerg players to consider the possibility that there is such a thing as too much macro and that maybe they are guilty of it at times.
You won't have 6 bases fully saturated. You want to shoot at 70-80 drones in the EG, You may have 6 bases but after 3 are fully saturated you ideally will just start to mine gas at the others. Also you won't have 30 drones per base, There comes to a point where your mineral production becomes less important than army production and pros/commentators have pegged that at 70-80ish late game. I would say 25-30 each for first 2 bases and less for each afterwards.
On July 23 2010 06:59 Deckkie wrote: About the Tech switch I think its a very big advantage. Think about the ZvP game from the King of the Beta (think it was IdrA vs Huk ... not sure) toss came with mass Collosis, and the Zerg could counter it relatively easy with Corrupters, because Zerg can tech-switch super fast. A terran or Protoss would have had much more problems with it. Also When a Zerg player looses drones, he can make ten new ones in a blink. Terran and Toss need to make them one by one. Conclusion Tech switch big advantage
You really haven't thought through anything in your post.
If you're Terran, you likely have a Starport regardless of strategy...if it's MMM, fast banshee, Ravens in Mech, etc. Terran see a Colossus, immediately swap their Starport to a Reactor and start pumping out double Vikings. Zerg, oppositely, can't get all their tech buildings in advance (for obvious reasons), so when Zerg sees a Colossus, they have to build a Spire, which takes roughly 17 minutes, and then change all their unit production into Corrupters, which are completely useless against the rest of the Protoss army and twice the cost of a Viking (the only reason Zerg players make Corrupters is lack of alternatives...they're a terrible unit). That you think Zerg can react and counter a Colossus faster than Terran is ridiculous. And that doesn't even include the point that Colossus don't hard counter all Terran ground like they do with Zerg, meaning unlike Zerg, Terran have several options of response.
You're point about replacing Drones ten at a time isn't an inherent advantage as it costs larvae, meaning that you can't be fortifying your army. I find it amazing how Non-Zerg players view Zerg through rose-colored glasses in nearly every discussion.
Yes your right, I did see Zerg through rose glasses, and have been told couple of times already how wrong I am, and Im sorry for that. But I do also think you might see terran through rose glasses as well. Terran has both factory's, raxes, and starports. and they have to build from all three of them. as terran you can not say: ohh I need some vickings lets first make ten off those and then ill go on with making bio/mech. And I have a question abut that (since I clearly dont know enough about Zerg) : dont you always tech to anti air in a basic build? or does that really weaken your ground army tech to much??
While I think the terran abilities are embellished slightly, it's not nearly enough to be considered "Through Rose colored glasses" If you want to make 10 vikings to supplement your army you would transfer your SP to a reactor and make 10 vikings in 2-3 minutes while making other units; In Zerg if you wanted to make an AA you would use 10 larvae plus possibly making the spire/den (that take 2.5 40 sec timings to recover. Furthermore if you have 10x larvae and 1000 + minerals and 500+ gas you are doing something wrong anyway, it's easier to pay for 10 vikings 2 at a time than it is for 10x zerg AA units (obviously you can do 2x Zerg AA at a time as well).
As far as teching to anti-air for your basic build... I wouldn't say that necessarily, quite a few builds tech to mutas and some tech to hydras but it's not because of a focus on AA, it's a focus on a more powerful unit than the roach or a good harassment unit (muta).
On July 22 2010 07:11 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: Okay so I can't count how many QQ threads I've seen on Zerg being underpowered how it's uncreative it needs changes blah blah blah. Well I play zerg and I'm constantly around some of the best zergs around and generally I tend to disagree and I'm about to explain why.
Tech Switches
Unlike other races where you need to build a whole new production facility to make a new set of units such as a factory a stargate, the zerg only needs to wait on a single tech building and then every single hatch/lair/hive can produce that unit. This makes Zerg the undeniable king of Tech Switching, yes the tech buildings can take quite a while to build but this is to balance out the fact that as soon as it's done there can be 20+ of that unit hatching at any given time.
This kind of rapid unit composition switching is unparalleled by the other races especially terran who has to deal with addons and switching them around if they want to change their unit composition even while dealing with the same units.
Mobility
The zerg air army can be very frightening when used correctly, creep giving movement boosts when exploited allows for aggressive creep expansion letting the zerg dominate the map early on in the game. Later in the game Nydus networks allow a zerg to move their army from one corner of the map to the other in the blink of an eye. Fungal Growth used effectively can stop the mobility of their opponents completely. Zerg is capable of out maneuvering every other race in the game with the exeption of the use of mass recall by protoss but that has limited uses when compared to a good nydus network setup.
Unit Production
Zerg has the capability to reproduce units faster than any other race with the queen mechanics, larva spit is so completely powerful and watching the top zergs at the moment you will see that even they don't miss larva injections. The zerg macro mechanic is tough to deal with as you have to manage every hatchery seperately requiring a lot more multitasking than warpins or dealing with add-ons. But when done effectively the rate at which a zerg can produce units is rather scary.
Conclusion
Zerg has many mechanics that still have not been used to their fullest:
Larva Injection (yes pros still mess this up)
Transfusion strategies
Contamination
Nydus Networks both offensively and defensively
So until this game is released and players get the time to REALLY get their hands on zerg and play with it and experiment then I don't think it's right to really be commenting on how zerg is broken it doesn't work yada yada. Previously people complained that Ultras werent usable and that they were the reason why zerg didn't have any units and now Ultras are being used in top level play somewhat. There might be a few more adjustments to zerg units down the road but for now saying "Zerg sucks fix it now" is a bit of an exaggeration.
Tech switches: Granted Zerg can tech switch the easiest, their switches don't have as large of an impact when the other races switch because most of their units don't hard counter. Banelings hard counter marines and mutas hard counter units that cant attack air....thats about it.
Mobility: I gotta agree FG is a really powerful spell since it restricts movement. Also slings make map control on certain maps really easy. However, that's not to say the other races are that severely handicapped in comparison. Just like sc1, dropships are very effective. And proxy pylons give a huge degree of mobility. As for nydus canal, I'd rather have warp prism.
Unit Production: Yeah the larvae injection mechanic gives Zerg a huge amount of potential. Zerg can respawn armies like nothing but this is pretty much a necessity. In equal food battles (especially those that approach the higher food counts), Zerg armies just get decimated. The unit production advantage for Z is offset by the fact that their units are "expendable." Protoss chronoboost is also really helpful on warpgates. Maybe some P will start making extra nexuses when they have huge amount of minerals to augment their unit production.
Conclusion: Just like how most complaints about Z being too weak are one sided and biased, your arguments for Z being good also don't really address the other side of the argument (their weaknesses). But since you don't really say Z is overpowered or anything, I can't disagree with your post.
All races have unexplored possibilities but I think Zerg is still missing something on a fundamental level, like they need a new early game unit or a new spell-caster. Just something to throw some unpredictability into the mix of a Zerg army. There just aren't many options for Zerg right now.
I like your point about contaminate. This is a VERY under used ability if you ask me, especially against targets like Thors and Tanks. I also think there are a lot of burrow strategies that haven't been used very much. I have not seen a thorough use of baneling mines, something that I think could help against the very slow, immobile terran mech, or especially a bio ball or zealot/ templar heavy army. The infestor's 'infested marines while burrowed' has begun to see some use, but I think it will see more. And the roaches move while burrowed can be great for something as simple as a pincer attack.
I think the infestor is completed as it is. Overseer I think would need another spell. I personally don't like the changeling ability because I think good player will end up killing them pretty fast and the overseer himself scout pretty good. Contaminate is great however, I use it a lot (usually make one overseer after teching to lair and only use contaminate). Ultra could use a little boost in usefulness. Nydus could be good, however usually getting overlord speed+drop matches that pretty good, nydus is faster if your exp are far away. I think corrupter could get another spell than the actual corruption but I think it's fine too.
I find for Z the unit role of many units kind of overlap but they all have some specialty. I would work on the overseer to give Z some fun stuff IMO.
For protoss I think especially carrier and mothership need a rework. It seems to me that it'll be pretty hard to get them unless it's a super large map and the carrier don't look that strong to me. DT kind of suck once your discovered I think, it's a pretty big investment.
Terran the only unit I don't like atm are reaper. They aren't that pricey and I'm sure they can be used good but it seems like late game they'll be largely useless. Other than that I think terran looks pretty fun.
The problem with maps like Deseart Oasis. It's really pick my poison... If I go FE early banshee eat me alive, if I make air defense earlly I get behind in macro. It takes forever to get to his base on ground. While he can just fly over with Banshees and Medivacs.
Not to mention its very difficult to scout early on to see if that banshee is coming. If you manage to sneak in a drone before the wall off your might catch an early refinery, but that doesn't prove he's going one way or the other. If you try to scout with an OL you're very likely to lose it which is a major set back in the early game.
yeah exactly, there could be either a banshee or a couple of reapers. the drone scout gets blocked because it takes forever on land to get there, and the OL would just get shot down by a single marine before you can see everything you need.
Zerg's mobility & ability to quickly replenish an army is what I view as their biggest asset in SC2. I find them very powerful as many players are able to win with them in a straight up 1A style with Roach/Hydra, let alone if drops or other little tactics are used beforehand to whittle down the opponents army first.
On July 23 2010 06:59 Deckkie wrote: About the Tech switch I think its a very big advantage. Think about the ZvP game from the King of the Beta (think it was IdrA vs Huk ... not sure) toss came with mass Collosis, and the Zerg could counter it relatively easy with Corrupters, because Zerg can tech-switch super fast. A terran or Protoss would have had much more problems with it. Also When a Zerg player looses drones, he can make ten new ones in a blink. Terran and Toss need to make them one by one. Conclusion Tech switch big advantage
You really haven't thought through anything in your post.
If you're Terran, you likely have a Starport regardless of strategy...if it's MMM, fast banshee, Ravens in Mech, etc. Terran see a Colossus, immediately swap their Starport to a Reactor and start pumping out double Vikings. Zerg, oppositely, can't get all their tech buildings in advance (for obvious reasons), so when Zerg sees a Colossus, they have to build a Spire, which takes roughly 17 minutes, and then change all their unit production into Corrupters, which are completely useless against the rest of the Protoss army and twice the cost of a Viking (the only reason Zerg players make Corrupters is lack of alternatives...they're a terrible unit). That you think Zerg can react and counter a Colossus faster than Terran is ridiculous. And that doesn't even include the point that Colossus don't hard counter all Terran ground like they do with Zerg, meaning unlike Zerg, Terran have several options of response.
You're point about replacing Drones ten at a time isn't an inherent advantage as it costs larvae, meaning that you can't be fortifying your army. I find it amazing how Non-Zerg players view Zerg through rose-colored glasses in nearly every discussion.
Yes your right, I did see Zerg through rose glasses, and have been told couple of times already how wrong I am, and Im sorry for that. But I do also think you might see terran through rose glasses as well. Terran has both factory's, raxes, and starports. and they have to build from all three of them. as terran you can not say: ohh I need some vickings lets first make ten off those and then ill go on with making bio/mech. And I have a question abut that (since I clearly dont know enough about Zerg) : dont you always tech to anti air in a basic build? or does that really weaken your ground army tech to much??
Teching to AA is complicated in terms of timing. All early AA for Zerg is defensive (Queens and Spores), so if Zerg scouts air incoming, they'll make extra Queens, throw up a few spores and possibly lay down a Hydra Den (which is also defensive in the early game since Hydra are so slow off creep).
Here's the problem though...a typical Terran opening could be Hellion and some Marines, so what should Zerg do to respond? It's counter intuitive to go Lair and throw Spores up everywhere in case the next Terran move is Banshee. Terran can move a million different directions from that opening -- you could see MMM next (so even scouting a Starport is inconclusive); you could see heavy Mech; or you could see some Banshee harass. All three of those options require entirely different responses from Zerg, making real-time scouting crucial in those early/mid-game moments.
Oppositely, if a Terran sees a Zerg player coming at him with 5-6 Roaches early, they aren't concerned about a banaling bust follow-up or fast Muta. Zerg always need to be reacting; Terran do not.
Its not that Zerg is that bad. Its that it pales in comparison to a complete race like terran. If anything keep zerg the same and nerf the other races.
Terran simply has too many options. Hellion opener with reactor?? 3rax marine/marauder stim push? viking/dropship? thor drop? tank drop? preigniter? reaper? banshee? marauder/hellion push before spire? its the fact that a race has been given too many tools and effective counters for that said race have been drastically reduced. A free blockoff and the ability to open up all tech trees within a short time of the game starting. Combine that with clear hard counters (people who keep saying thor isnt a hard counter to muta are being ridiculous). The reason mech is so strong is that it features a very robust unit composition which contains clear hard counters to light air, light ground, armored ground It's silly. Simply put, it is too effective.
Zerg? not so much. This philosophy of giving a race murky counters and limited options is fine. However if that's the case then the rest of the races should be normalized as such.
I am going to take the oposite stand and explain why I believe Zerg is not good, or better yet why Zerg is not as good as the other two races. In this arguement not only will I take into account what we have already seen today in the most recent tournament battles but also the inherent potential of development of the races in the game.
1) Zerg have a uni-dimensional development
Because each individual unit is enabled by building the coresponding tech structure, the tech paths of zerg are very linear. You get get Zerglings then Roaches the Hydras, pretty much in a straight line, thus making the advance in the tree pretty much predictible. Zerg will never be able to do stuff like: get a Tech Lab at the Barracks to get Marrauders, but pop a Reaper first for some harrass. Oh, factory is finished, switch the tech lab over for instant tank production. The ramifications for this are endless. (same example works for protoss very well with pretty much all tech buildings).
The fact that unit building structures have multiple units enabled at start give the other two races a much more unpredictible transition possibility which zerg lacks. Zerg will just enable 1 unit at a time. If you see Hydra Den, you know exactly what to expect and how soon its gonna come. All linear and limited play.
2) Zerg units lack versatility.
Both other races have harrass units that can bolster the main army - like banshees or void rays; support units that also enable elaborate tactics - Medivacs heal and can be used to drop, Sentries can use FF to split armies but also to block ramps defensively or offensively; upgrades which enhance the way a unit can be utilised: Blink Stalkers, Stim and Concussive Shell...
Zerg has none of that. All you get is: here, have this unit, it is good at that, use it that way. Roach burrow play is the only upgrade that might add some flavor, but it is very gimmicky in the first place (i.e. 1 scan and u lose). Look at the upgrades for Zerg: pretty much all of them spell: this unit is now faster, or has a better range or better armor... all in all uncreative.
Can there even be a comparison between the Blink for stalkers and the Hydra range upgrade?? The first spells "omg cool new possibilities" the second... "well, I guess my hydras will shoot farther now". How about an activated ability which increases Hydra range by 2 (from 6 to 8) for like 8-10 seconds... that would open some nice play...
Each zerg unit is good at its own role and that's it. Which pretty much means no room for extra creativity and cute play.
3) Zerg has the lowest micromanagement need
Every T and P unit can be greately enhanced by microing it around. Either because it has an ability to use or because of its design. A few examples: Stalkers: high range, very fast can be used to pick off slower, lower range units like roaches or marines. Blink. Sentries: FF, GS, Hallucination Immortals: making them absorb the tank shots, immortal drops pheonix: picking up stuff, moving shot to keep out of range of mutas etc Marines: stim Marrauders: concussive shell kite, stim Viking: landing action Hellion: harrass Thor: Thor Drops etc etc etc
Lets see how zerg has to micro: you get to move your mutas around (which with how ridiculous Missile Turrets and Thors are you cant even do cute Muta Micro as in BW), you get to move your lings around for some surrounds, eventually rearrange your army when sending it into battle and maybe some infestor play.
All because zerg units are pretty sluggish and bland. Hydras - all zerg makes those, what can they do... well, they can shoot. How do you micro them? well... you a-move... and retreat when it doesnt work.
How about... I dunno... make overlords spill creep while they move so you can create a trail of creep which can serve as a creep highway for your units by moving your overlord in front of your army... and you would need to make sure the ovie is always in front, and the units must keep up as the creep will wear off in time (just a wild thing out the top of my head.)
4) Zerg has very limited harrass options.
A game that is nice to watch has a ton of action. Nobody wants to see a 30 minute game where both players macro up to the final battle. The idea that Zerg is a "reactionary race" is just another word for crap race. It is simply poor game design to leave a race take all the pounding and repell harrass after harrass just to win in the end-game by out-macro-ing its oponent. It bores the players and it bores the viewers.
It limits creativity and meta-game progression. We've seen the countless ways Terrans can open and transition while keeping the pressure up on its oponent. It strenghtens the idea that the race has a deep undiscovered potential, it makes it worth exploring and expanding. In today's state, the zerg we see, will continue to fend off attacks and macro up for 10 more years. Nothing much will change because there is not much room for it.
With the new game mechanics that allow perfectly zergling-tight walls, and roaches which are an absolute piece of crap slow unit, zerg is pretty much of no threat early on. Rushing to Mutalisks? No problem, 2 Missile Turrets with their absurd damage and low cost and you are safe. Hydralisks? Well, let me just put this here tank on my ledge and play TvZ - "The Tower Defense"...
How about a disruption web like ability on those corruptors, or some sneakier way to break those wall-ins at the ramp, like burrowed roaches moving underneath buildings or cliffs, or some sort of zergling catapult that would be fun... I dunno, something
There is a reason why in chess, it is White who is almost always favored to win. Because it has the initiative. Because Black is the reactionary race... think about it.
5)Zerg cannot abuse Terrain
Zerg has absolutely no unit that can abuse cliffs, ramps, ledges, chokes and all other crazy stuff map-makers will put in their maps. Therefore map makers really have to be careful about the maps they make. Races cannot be balanced in function of a map, it will just never work.
What about the opposite? Huge flat maps with empty spaces? Well, zerg will have trouble on those too, as hellions can enter ur base with ease and protoss early pushes will be much harder to defend. Which means that other races do fine on different kinds of maps, it is only zerg who will suffer because of maps with funky terrain.
Where's our Lurker or other unit that can abuse ramps and chokes and stuff? gone.. but wait all is good we have the baneling....
Anyway, I might continue this later on.. but I think I made sufficient points to counter your arguement.
On July 25 2010 06:16 Kvz wrote: Its not that Zerg is that bad. Its that it pales in comparison to a complete race like terran. If anything keep zerg the same and nerf the other races.
Terran simply has too many options. Hellion opener with reactor?? 3rax marine/marauder stim push? viking/dropship? thor drop? tank drop? preigniter? reaper? banshee? marauder/hellion push before spire? its the fact that a race has been given too many tools and effective counters for that said race have been drastically reduced. A free blockoff and the ability to open up all tech trees within a short time of the game starting. Combine that with clear hard counters (people who keep saying thor isnt a hard counter to muta are being ridiculous). The reason mech is so strong is that it features a very robust unit composition which contains clear hard counters to light air, light ground, armored ground It's silly. Simply put, it is too effective.
Zerg? not so much. This philosophy of giving a race murky counters and limited options is fine. However if that's the case then the rest of the races should be normalized as such.
I think Kvz hit it on the head, except I don't think they should nerf the other races. I think Terran and Protoss are really fun. Zerg seems like the race that was brought in last and needs to balance to the other two (which I believe it was). I don't know what they should do honestly.
I don't feel that zerg is underpowered or bad. But they are very frustrating to play sometimes. Terran and Protoss both can field armies of doom as I like to call it. Basically an army that you cannot take head on without heavy casualties. Think anything + thor, or anything + colossus (or mech, an army you pretty much can't take head on at all). As zerg your recourse against armies like that is pretty limited. Before they nerfed NP to oblivion infestors were pretty good against thors/colossi, but well that was before. Now you really have very little options against armies of doom. You do have options, it just feels very pidgeonholed. Think about your response to thor marine. Thor marauder. Colossus lot stalker is a personal favorite. Your best recourse against lot stalker is terrible against colossus. Throw in immortals and sentries for maximum excitement. You better have creep and some nice micro to beat their a move army.
Mobility. Just go around the army. Works but it is difficult. And what if the Terran player decides to just take his army to your base anyway? Well unless your mobile army kills his base faster than his army of doom kills yours, you are going to lose that fight.
I want to point out again that I think mobility CAN win against mech and I'm not saying you cannot beat these armies. But it is FRUSTRATING. You win by running away? You just have to give up any base that this army decides to attack, because you're the mobile race? I would much rather have an army that can't be beaten head on, or heaven forbid an army that can beat such an army.
Next Mutalisks. Mutalisks are awesome, but a terran just has to get 2-3 thors to ruin your day. Thors don't just beat mutas, they annihilate them. 3 Thors will kill x number of mins/gas/supply in the blink of an eye. They are so bad against Thors you can't even bring them to the fight. Even arriving late, the Thors will instantly target them and disintegrate. No matter how you shake it, no matter how important it is for balance, this is really really frustrating. I can't think of any other unit that shuts down another unit so hard. At least templar and infestors have to use energy and are really fragile. Maybe hellions in sufficient number against anything light (but let's be honest, losing 20 zerglings is a far cry from losing 20 mutalisks). /shrug
And lastly, although I shouldn't have saved this for last, I have been talking in extremes even though I didn't mean it. I recognize that ultralisks and brood lords are both solid units and can make and break armies of doom. But they are also both pretty high tech and generally, from what I've seen, both T and P can field their doom armies well before ultras or BLs appear. If you actually make it to Hive tech then I think Zerg are fine. It's that Lair - Hive area where they are really frustrating, and also in that area where many games seem to be decided.
I am going to take the oposite stand and explain why I believe Zerg is not good, or better yet why Zerg is not as good as the other two races. In this arguement not only will I take into account what we have already seen today in the most recent tournament battles but also the inherent potential of development of the races in the game.
1) Zerg have a uni-dimensional development
Because each individual unit is enabled by building the coresponding tech structure, the tech paths of zerg are very linear. You get get Zerglings then Roaches the Hydras, pretty much in a straight line, thus making the advance in the tree pretty much predictible. Zerg will never be able to do stuff like: get a Tech Lab at the Barracks to get Marrauders, but pop a Reaper first for some harrass. Oh, factory is finished, switch the tech lab over for instant tank production. The ramifications for this are endless. (same example works for protoss very well with pretty much all tech buildings).
The fact that unit building structures have multiple units enabled at start give the other two races a much more unpredictible transition possibility which zerg lacks. Zerg will just enable 1 unit at a time. If you see Hydra Den, you know exactly what to expect and how soon its gonna come. All linear and limited play.
2) Zerg units lack versatility.
Both other races have harrass units that can bolster the main army - like banshees or void rays; support units that also enable elaborate tactics - Medivacs heal and can be used to drop, Sentries can use FF to split armies but also to block ramps defensively or offensively; upgrades which enhance the way a unit can be utilised: Blink Stalkers, Stim and Concussive Shell...
Zerg has none of that. All you get is: here, have this unit, it is good at that, use it that way. Roach burrow play is the only upgrade that might add some flavor, but it is very gimmicky in the first place (i.e. 1 scan and u lose). Look at the upgrades for Zerg: pretty much all of them spell: this unit is now faster, or has a better range or better armor... all in all uncreative.
Can there even be a comparison between the Blink for stalkers and the Hydra range upgrade?? The first spells "omg cool new possibilities" the second... "well, I guess my hydras will shoot farther now". How about an activated ability which increases Hydra range by 2 (from 6 to 8) for like 8-10 seconds... that would open some nice play...
Each zerg unit is good at its own role and that's it. Which pretty much means no room for extra creativity and cute play.
3) Zerg has the lowest micromanagement need
Every T and P unit can be greately enhanced by microing it around. Either because it has an ability to use or because of its design. A few examples: Stalkers: high range, very fast can be used to pick off slower, lower range units like roaches or marines. Blink. Sentries: FF, GS, Hallucination Immortals: making them absorb the tank shots, immortal drops pheonix: picking up stuff, moving shot to keep out of range of mutas etc Marines: stim Marrauders: concussive shell kite, stim Viking: landing action Hellion: harrass Thor: Thor Drops etc etc etc
Lets see how zerg has to micro: you get to move your mutas around (which with how ridiculous Missile Turrets and Thors are you cant even do cute Muta Micro as in BW), you get to move your lings around for some surrounds, eventually rearrange your army when sending it into battle and maybe some infestor play.
All because zerg units are pretty sluggish and bland. Hydras - all zerg makes those, what can they do... well, they can shoot. How do you micro them? well... you a-move... and retreat when it doesnt work.
How about... I dunno... make overlords spill creep while they move so you can create a trail of creep which can serve as a creep highway for your units by moving your overlord in front of your army... and you would need to make sure the ovie is always in front, and the units must keep up as the creep will wear off in time (just a wild thing out the top of my head.)
4) Zerg has very limited harrass options.
A game that is nice to watch has a ton of action. Nobody wants to see a 30 minute game where both players macro up to the final battle. The idea that Zerg is a "reactionary race" is just another word for crap race. It is simply poor game design to leave a race take all the pounding and repell harrass after harrass just to win in the end-game by out-macro-ing its oponent. It bores the players and it bores the viewers.
It limits creativity and meta-game progression. We've seen the countless ways Terrans can open and transition while keeping the pressure up on its oponent. It strenghtens the idea that the race has a deep undiscovered potential, it makes it worth exploring and expanding. In today's state, the zerg we see, will continue to fend off attacks and macro up for 10 more years. Nothing much will change because there is not much room for it.
With the new game mechanics that allow perfectly zergling-tight walls, and roaches which are an absolute piece of crap slow unit, zerg is pretty much of no threat early on. Rushing to Mutalisks? No problem, 2 Missile Turrets with their absurd damage and low cost and you are safe. Hydralisks? Well, let me just put this here tank on my ledge and play TvZ - "The Tower Defense"...
How about a disruption web like ability on those corruptors, or some sneakier way to break those wall-ins at the ramp, like burrowed roaches moving underneath buildings or cliffs, or some sort of zergling catapult that would be fun... I dunno, something
There is a reason why in chess, it is White who is almost always favored to win. Because it has the initiative. Because Black is the reactionary race... think about it.
5)Zerg cannot abuse Terrain
Zerg has absolutely no unit that can abuse cliffs, ramps, ledges, chokes and all other crazy stuff map-makers will put in their maps. Therefore map makers really have to be careful about the maps they make. Races cannot be balanced in function of a map, it will just never work.
What about the opposite? Huge flat maps with empty spaces? Well, zerg will have trouble on those too, as hellions can enter ur base with ease and protoss early pushes will be much harder to defend. Which means that other races do fine on different kinds of maps, it is only zerg who will suffer because of maps with funky terrain.
Where's our Lurker or other unit that can abuse ramps and chokes and stuff? gone.. but wait all is good we have the baneling....
Anyway, I might continue this later on.. but I think I made sufficient points to counter your arguement.
Hit the nail on the head with pretty much all these points right there. But of course Terran needs its easy wins...
I've seen some posts venerating terran as the "manliest race to play" but it is actually the zerg, since the latter demands the most skill than the other two races. It'll be nice to hear from pro Korean zergs their insight on the race as a whole.
Here are some ideas to spice up zerg (don't take it too seriously lol)
Zergling Metabolic Boost - also make it an activate ability similar to Blink which allow zerglings to "glide down" from cliffs.
Makes use of those tiny wings they get from the upgrade, Blizz can make them open up in a span NOT make them flap though, it would look silly lol. Managing and separating your melee units from the ranged will be much easier.
Baneling Centrifugal Hooks - passively allow banelings to "Climb/Roll up" cliffs but at a slower move speed.
Makes sense if you ponder it, those hooks aren't just fit for horizontal movement. This opens up a new avenue for harass and make players actually research Hooks and morph more blings. Punishes players who "turtle it out" and not being vigilant enough, also provides zerg players an edge or chance to dictate the pace of the game.
Roach New Skill - an ability which enables roaches to emit a noxious gas which cling to their bodies and blocks the sight of enemies similar to smoke/tree sight obstruction mechanism, which of course does not affect friendly units and yours. This might as well serve as a buff to compensate their 2 supply count now.
Roaches then become a better tank with this skill, imagine a moving ball of "trees/smoke" which gradually position themselves in a perfect line and allow your hydras to safely snipe from their back. C'mon roaches here on earth are "dirty" lol, emitting green gas is not farfetched.
Overseer New Spell - in lieu of Dark Swarm, overseers can cast a similar cloud towards a target area and every 'ranged' unit under its cover will have their attack range reduced by let's say 40%.
This can be a potential remedy for Tanks/Thors obliterating your ball and also abuses their slow mobility, Colossi are not affected though since they are damn tall lol.
Corruptor Corruption - make it corrupt a target caster's energy also, which prevents them from casting spells.
Counters HTs, Medivacs, Raven, Ghosts and so on.. Gives the corruptor more "utility" not just destroy massive units.
Queen possible New Spell (I call it "the Swarm!") - a channeling spell like Infestor NP which "buffs" every unit nearby. Buffed units are given +1 damage for every other similar zerg unit of the "same species/strand" attacking the buffed unit's primary target, bonus damage caps at +3.
Scenario: 3 zerglings attacking a command center each dealing a base damage of 5, cast this skill and every zergling will get +2 damage because of his other two zergling companions. This pushes players to try "offensive queen play" making use of those extra queens you morphed at T1 to defend your base. Works wonders with Zerglings, Mutas, BROODLINGS, Hydras and more!
Is it me or is every air unit or anti air unit a counter to the mutalisk. I mean I'm just going through the units and what they're good against and everything is good against mutalisk. I mean are mutas really that good that you have to give each race 6 different viable options against them?
On July 25 2010 06:16 Kvz wrote: Its not that Zerg is that bad. Its that it pales in comparison to a complete race like terran. If anything keep zerg the same and nerf the other races.
Terran simply has too many options. Hellion opener with reactor?? 3rax marine/marauder stim push? viking/dropship? thor drop? tank drop? preigniter? reaper? banshee? marauder/hellion push before spire? its the fact that a race has been given too many tools and effective counters for that said race have been drastically reduced. A free blockoff and the ability to open up all tech trees within a short time of the game starting. Combine that with clear hard counters (people who keep saying thor isnt a hard counter to muta are being ridiculous). The reason mech is so strong is that it features a very robust unit composition which contains clear hard counters to light air, light ground, armored ground It's silly. Simply put, it is too effective.
Zerg? not so much. This philosophy of giving a race murky counters and limited options is fine. However if that's the case then the rest of the races should be normalized as such.
I think there is truth in this. Terran simply has too many stupidly good units, to the point where you could pick a composition of 3 or 4 random Terran units and it is probably good enough to deal with everything.
I mean, for AA they have Marines, Stimmed Marines, Vikings (huge range and mobility), and Thors (extreme durability, long range, AoE, and always backed up by marines). Thors are so strong that you only need ONE to shut down Muta harass, thus shutting off an entire tech tree for your opponent. Just pick one!
The issue of them having so many viable openings is also a problem, since they're extremely hard to scout. And if his cheese fails, he can always mass repair behind his wall and survive. In PvT, for example, you live in a constant state of fear because you don't know if he is going to go mech (strong mid-to-late game), open up fast Reaper (terrifyingly strong early game), go bioball and rush to EMP (scary strong timing push with stim and EMP that is very hard to survive), or hell, just wall off and go 3rax marine timing push for a WTF win. Or hell, forget to get enough AA and a detector and BAM, cloaking flying DT in your base (Banshees).
Then their MULES (guaranteed flood of minerals that take up zero pop) and extremely strong defensive units behind a wall (1 siege tank behind the wall shuts down any kind of early-mid aggression) guarantees they have the ability to sit in their base and remain technologically flexible. They can switch add-ons for instant timing pushes, such as dropping a factory on a Reactor and pumping Hellions to punish a Zerg.
They are extremely mobile, almost always having dropships as a part of their build (now that they double as medics). They have the almost exclusive ability to abuse cliffs, to the point where some maps (like LT, DO, or Kulas) make non-Terran players groan when they see PvT/ZvT on the loading screen.
Terran has too much good shit that synergizes too well together. A lot of people say that "then they should buff the other races, not nerf Terran" but that simply isn't true- a game in which everything works would just be a mess, and timing pushes, subtlety, and diversity would break down entirely. We need units with well-defined roles that synergize well with a select few other units, outside of gimmicky creative usage, so that there can be a certain amount of reliability and predictability.
In BW races took a while to build up to things. But for Terran in SC2, simply getting something instantly shuts down a window of time for their opponent: for example, getting a Thor (on top of a few Marines) instantly invalidates Muta harass against 1 or 2 bases (compare this to building up Marine+Medic ctrl groups in BW, or slowly massing Goliaths off of 3+ factories), and getting a Siege Tank behind a wall instantly negates any kind of ground aggression by your opponent. Other races can't do that.
/bitching over. Just keep in mind that there is a reason most games against Terran either end in some crazy cheese by the non-Terran, or are long, drawn out macro games where the non-Terran player struggles to find a unit composition to beat Terran's anti-everything blobs. Once pro Koreans switch to SC2, Terran is going to appear incredibly imbalanced.
And for the record, I think that ZvP is mostly fine, since Corruptors exist as a counter to Colossi. ZvT feels like ZvP with cliff abuse, range 13 Colossi, and the complete impossibility of using air units. It really makes me want to hang myself.
My solution for all of this is pretty simple. Nerf the shit out of Thor AA capabilities, make Overlord speed 50/50 again, let Roaches burrow under buildings, and give Hellions a gas cost so they aren't extremely-effective units that the Terran can afford to throw away willy-nilly. None of these changes particularly affect TvP but would make ZvT waaaaaaaaay better. I think that lowering the energy cost of Corruption might be a good idea, too, so that Zerg players can try to slow their opponent's teching, giving them a bit of time to react and forcing their opponent to defend against it.
Actually I believe it would be in the best interest of the game if all races felt and behaved like Terran. Keep in mind that this is a game made in 2010, it must be worthy of such thing.
Depth and complexity is what will keep this game alive and I feel they have succeeded in adding that for at least 1 race.
Look it just comes down to tanks. Sure thors kill muta, but they also cost 300 gas each, and 1 thor loses to 4 muta (400 gas). Vikings cant effectivly deal with muta alone (with backup they do really well). So all in all I think the air war is working out well. Its the ground war that really destroys zerg. Nothing can kill the tanks on the ground (before T3 for zerg), cost for cost, given any kind of decent backup for the tank. That is a problem. Now tanks in TvP are fine, immortals, blinking stalkers, fast charge lots, all effective counters to the tank. So I think the tank needs to be changed, not so it isnt good, but just so that it has some kind of zerg unit before T3 that can deal with it. Without unbalancing it for TvP play. I think the key is reducing the splash, but increesing the damage. Lower splash, means its less effective in TvZ, but higher damage means its still as effective in TvP. Effectivly allowing the roach to be a stronger counter against mek. This would force more marauder/tank/thor allowing muta to come back into the play (now that thier will be fewer thors/marines), as well as allowing roach to beat a player only going for marines and tanks (if you play smart).
On July 25 2010 16:34 obsid wrote: Look it just comes down to tanks. Sure thors kill muta, but they also cost 300 gas each,
hm, last I knew it was 300min/200 gas? And yes, 4 Mutas can kill 1 Thor, but of course, the thor just sits there, and the zerg has to dance around with his mutas spreading them out like theres no tomorrow (and there isnt, most of the time).
What bugs me is the huge range actually.. same thing on vikings as well, heck, most terran units. Why do they have this huge range advantage? Yeah, sure, Thor are "immobile" (they actually move fast enough imo), but what does this matter when they dont need to move, due to their huge range
And please, get rid of that 12 secs duration on NP.. Make it at least 30 secs
On July 25 2010 16:34 obsid wrote: Look it just comes down to tanks. Sure thors kill muta, but they also cost 300 gas each, and 1 thor loses to 4 muta (400 gas). Vikings cant effectivly deal with muta alone (with backup they do really well). So all in all I think the air war is working out well. Its the ground war that really destroys zerg. Nothing can kill the tanks on the ground (before T3 for zerg), cost for cost, given any kind of decent backup for the tank. That is a problem. Now tanks in TvP are fine, immortals, blinking stalkers, fast charge lots, all effective counters to the tank. So I think the tank needs to be changed, not so it isnt good, but just so that it has some kind of zerg unit before T3 that can deal with it. Without unbalancing it for TvP play. I think the key is reducing the splash, but increesing the damage. Lower splash, means its less effective in TvZ, but higher damage means its still as effective in TvP. Effectivly allowing the roach to be a stronger counter against mek. This would force more marauder/tank/thor allowing muta to come back into the play (now that thier will be fewer thors/marines), as well as allowing roach to beat a player only going for marines and tanks (if you play smart).
Blizz won't nerf tanks, and Terran players will scream bloody murder.
Keep in mind: Mutas counter tanks. If we take out the obnoxious doomsday anti air abilities of the Thor, we'll have options to keep tanks down.
Corruptors might need a tiny boost though, otherwise he can transition into mass Viking and win (look at TLO vs Sen in EU vs Asia).
the a-move-faceroll terran requires way too much micro/stars-aligning to defeat for this matchup to be balanced.
the stupid target priority with the thor doesnt help. if ur going to make the thor kill muta in a few hits, make the terran player manually target your muta. Having the thor auto-shoot your muta the second they are within half a screen away is ridiculously stupid. At least requiring manual targeting would allow the zerg to send in ground forces first, thors attack them, then use that opportunity to sweep in with muta to take the thors out.
Having played zerg all through beta, and watched a ton of replays/casts along the way, I'm left with the feeling that zerg is "unfinished" or "unrefined" more than anything. Not particularly "bad" or "weaker", just that they didn't really take time to add interesting and useful features to zerg especially the end-game units. Other than the +1/2/3 upgrades, which apply to all races and in most cases, entire classes of units:
One example -- brood lords. A nice, powerful, albeit expensive unit, but with no real upgrades available (melee upgrades apply to the broodlings only). There's no upgrade for more broodlings, or faster flying, or really anything else. They do one thing -- lumber around the map slowly, and hope that their player has provided them with some fighter cover to fend off enemy AA (think B-17s without 50 cal turrets). No spell casting whatsoever, just A-move and then micro away from anti-air. Terran battle cruisers have anti-ground and anti-air, along with the Yamato cannon for burst damage. Carriers have upgrades for extra zip-around-thingies (the name escapes me -- never lasted long enough playing protoss to get carriers).
Ultralisk -- really, really boring. Terrible pathing, nothing to do except mass up, get the standard +2 upgrade, and go bash stuff. Now they can break forcefields (assuming they can reach them). Special ability -- headbutt a building. Not very fun. Trying to manuever is the entirety of their micro potential.
Corruptor -- biggest disappointment in the zerg army. Corruption spell is probably worth spamming but battles happen too fast to know if it's making a difference, and there's nothing else to do with their energy. Other than melting Collossus, very underwhelming. When I have them in a late game army it's basically for protecting my brood lords and then morphing when gas or food count permits. Still can't figure out why Collossus is tall enough for corruptors to attack, but Thors aren't. I know they shrunk the Thor, but they're still pretty big.
Infestor -- the one possible bright spot, after a neural parasite upgrade they're somewhat flexible. Still squishy as hell, but I didn't have much time to experiment with casting while burrowed. The 12 second NP timer was probably necessary but greatly diminished the fear factor for the infestor.
On July 26 2010 03:18 starcat wrote: the a-move-faceroll terran requires way too much micro/stars-aligning to defeat for this matchup to be balanced.
the stupid target priority with the thor doesnt help. if ur going to make the thor kill muta in a few hits, make the terran player manually target your muta. Having the thor auto-shoot your muta the second they are within half a screen away is ridiculously stupid. At least requiring manual targeting would allow the zerg to send in ground forces first, thors attack them, then use that opportunity to sweep in with muta to take the thors out.
or make corruptors attack thors.
I've thought about this as a solution, but I dislike it for a few reasons: 1) An anti-air unit attacking an anti-air unit is silly 2) Corruptors serve no purpose except killing the Thors (they aren't cost efficient against Vikings) which leaves you with a bunch of useless units (until T3.5, anyway, which might as well be forever) 3) Thors still rape Mutas and are still capable of forming a nuclear-anti-air critical mass.
The cold fact is that Terran DOESN'T NEED the Thor as an anti-air unit. T already has stimmed Marines, Vikings, Raven HSM, very strong Turrets, friggin EARLY WARNING RADAR SYSTEMS, and BCs (lategame).
If Terran wants to be able to annihilate everything in the air, they should have to build up to it by making loads of Vikings - which can actually be done quickly thanks to Reactors. But it is absurd, and detrimental to the timings of the matchup, to have Mutas be completely invalidated the second a Thor pops out (and Terran players have mastered their Thor timing).
Zerg has no timing push in the game. They just have to survive pressure upon pressure and push after push, fend off endless harass, and STILL outmacro their opponent long enough to bludgeon them to death with good positioning, better micro, and greater numbers.
On July 26 2010 03:28 jester121 wrote: Corruptor -- biggest disappointment in the zerg army. Corruption spell is probably worth spamming but battles happen too fast to know if it's making a difference, and there's nothing else to do with their energy.
I agree so much on the corruptor. It's the worst designed AA unit. Just look at the phoenix and the viking: their are just unique.
Blizzard did something unique but totally crazy: in the early stages of the game, the corruption (mind controling units) was the core of the corruptor. Ok it was impossible to let something like that in the beta.
It seems like plan B was "let's just put an a+click unit and we will add a corrupt thing which has no role in their anti air role" (the first version of corruption in the beta).
Zerg has absolutely no unit that can abuse cliffs, ramps, ledges, chokes and all other crazy stuff map-makers will put in their maps.
What about Guardians? I mean... Brood lors They have long range, can withstand lots of damage and you can do some terrain harass like one would with carriers .
Zerg has absolutely no unit that can abuse cliffs, ramps, ledges, chokes and all other crazy stuff map-makers will put in their maps.
What about Guardians? I mean... Brood lors They have long range, can withstand lots of damage and you can do some terrain harass like one would with carriers .
On July 25 2010 14:12 Count_Waltz wrote: Is it me or is every air unit or anti air unit a counter to the mutalisk. I mean I'm just going through the units and what they're good against and everything is good against mutalisk. I mean are mutas really that good that you have to give each race 6 different viable options against them?
Well sure, a unit that can ignore terrain and bypass chokes is pretty damn good. Now give it the ability in a small group to tear down a hatchery in under 10 seconds, and you have the Banshee. Tada!
A Reaper can come out well within 4 minutes and is an incredible harasser. A Colossus can come in well within 8 minutes and is a mainstay in PvZ and PvT. A Brood Lord will come in... well, never, because the game will be long over.
Both Reapers and Colossi benefit from the fact that, aside from the Robotics Bay, they only require buildings that are going to be built anyway. Everyone gets a Barracks with a tech lab, everyone gets a Robotics Facility. Nobody gets a Hive, nobody gets a Greater Spire. So not only do you get Brood Lords much, much later than the equivalent mobile siegers, but they require you to go out of your way to build them. So much for "tech switching", eh?
Also, they have only twice the amount of HP as a Viking, they go down super easy for something so expensive.
so the thread totally derailed into pointless "EVRYTHING IMBA! MY RACE TOTALLY SUXXX!" posts by former bnet forum users. well done folks! esp at the post above me. never seen such totally random and useless stat comparisons before.
Well sure, a unit that can ignore terrain and bypass chokes is pretty damn good. Now give it the ability in a small group to tear down a hatchery in under 10 seconds, and you have the Banshee. Tada!
banshees cost as much as tanks (almost). they are fragile,cant defend against air and die to any AA in the game.
also what is the better position for you? 6 banshees which can be dealt with by a few hydras/2-3 spores or 6 tanks? or 6 banshees vs 3 colloxen? whats the bigger threat? ya thought so.
you are just trying to find something to complain about.
/edit after reading the post below me i will now stay out of this thread. its sad what tl has come to regarding balance discussions.in this thread its EXACTLY like in the bnet forums with people crying about evrything as long as their race isnt instawin/all races are exactly the same. i mean wallin imba? P>Z scouting tier1? really?
There's another point often forgotten in the Zerg debate and that's walling off. Granted, this heavily relies on the map pool right now, but because Zerg can't wall off, it doesn't have the option of making a wall, sticking three ranged units behind it and then teching to w/e they want.
Using a TvZ game as an example, let's say that as Zerg I make some lings and take the watch towers and then leave the rest of them just outside the Terran base. I'm now completely in the dark until I tech and upgrade Overlord Speed or get an Overseer. Terran are free to scout me as they wish, be it with units or a scan and I'm powerless. If I rush for tech, I could be faced with a mass group of Mauraders at any moment, from which the only counter during T1 is MASS lings -- Roaches and Blings are owned. I can't mass up lings just in case and not tech because I might instead see Banshee's or Mech pop out. The window of uncertainty is inherently unfair.
One possible solution -- other than elimininating tight entry points into bases on maps -- is perhaps decreasing the build time of Spine Crawlers. That way, if I see a massive blob of units popping out of their wall, I can take drones off mining and make some quick defense.
I'm not sure if that would solve everything, but I'm really at a loss for how Blizzard doesn't see the issue. How is it fair to have only one race that can't wall in and can't scout in T1?
On July 27 2010 02:43 BeMannerDuPenner wrote: so the thread totally derailed into pointless "EVRYTHING IMBA! MY RACE TOTALLY SUXXX!" posts by former bnet forum users. well done folks! esp at the post above me. never seen such totally random and useless stat comparisons before.
Well sure, a unit that can ignore terrain and bypass chokes is pretty damn good. Now give it the ability in a small group to tear down a hatchery in under 10 seconds, and you have the Banshee. Tada!
banshees cost as much as tanks (almost). they are fragile,cant defend against air and die to any AA in the game.
also what is the better position for you? 6 banshees which can be dealt with by a few hydras/2-3 spores or 6 tanks? or 6 banshees vs 3 colloxen? whats the bigger threat? ya thought so.
you are just trying to find something to complain about.
/edit after reading the post below me i will now stay out of this thread. its sad what tl has come to regarding balance discussions.in this thread its EXACTLY like in the bnet forums with people crying about evrything as long as their race isnt instawin/all races are exactly the same. i mean wallin imba? P>Z scouting tier1? really?
I looked at the post below you, then I looked at yours again. Your post resembles the official forum much closer than his. He argues why he believe Zerg is at disadvantage and even gives suggestion on how to improve it, while your post does not have anything to do in this thread. He does not say anything about instawin etc..
You will find people that do stupid posts anywhere and it is possible to ignore them (I hope..?). If you quote the posts then you just highlight them even more... I know I should have ignored your post if I had been a better human being!
A Reaper can come out well within 4 minutes and is an incredible harasser. A Colossus can come in well within 8 minutes and is a mainstay in PvZ and PvT. A Brood Lord will come in... well, never, because the game will be long over.
Both Reapers and Colossi benefit from the fact that, aside from the Robotics Bay, they only require buildings that are going to be built anyway. Everyone gets a Barracks with a tech lab, everyone gets a Robotics Facility. Nobody gets a Hive, nobody gets a Greater Spire. So not only do you get Brood Lords much, much later than the equivalent mobile siegers, but they require you to go out of your way to build them. So much for "tech switching", eh?
Also, they have only twice the amount of HP as a Viking, they go down super easy for something so expensive.
I love you Raelcun. So true. But I think Protoss might beat them in mobility with lots of Warp Prisms. Also, for that mobility, zerg HAS to make creep tumors regularly.
I am going to take the oposite stand and explain why I believe Zerg is not good, or better yet why Zerg is not as good as the other two races. In this arguement not only will I take into account what we have already seen today in the most recent tournament battles but also the inherent potential of development of the races in the game.
1) Zerg have a uni-dimensional development
Because each individual unit is enabled by building the coresponding tech structure, the tech paths of zerg are very linear. You get get Zerglings then Roaches the Hydras, pretty much in a straight line, thus making the advance in the tree pretty much predictible. Zerg will never be able to do stuff like: get a Tech Lab at the Barracks to get Marrauders, but pop a Reaper first for some harrass. Oh, factory is finished, switch the tech lab over for instant tank production. The ramifications for this are endless. (same example works for protoss very well with pretty much all tech buildings).
The fact that unit building structures have multiple units enabled at start give the other two races a much more unpredictible transition possibility which zerg lacks. Zerg will just enable 1 unit at a time. If you see Hydra Den, you know exactly what to expect and how soon its gonna come. All linear and limited play.
2) Zerg units lack versatility.
Both other races have harrass units that can bolster the main army - like banshees or void rays; support units that also enable elaborate tactics - Medivacs heal and can be used to drop, Sentries can use FF to split armies but also to block ramps defensively or offensively; upgrades which enhance the way a unit can be utilised: Blink Stalkers, Stim and Concussive Shell...
Zerg has none of that. All you get is: here, have this unit, it is good at that, use it that way. Roach burrow play is the only upgrade that might add some flavor, but it is very gimmicky in the first place (i.e. 1 scan and u lose). Look at the upgrades for Zerg: pretty much all of them spell: this unit is now faster, or has a better range or better armor... all in all uncreative.
Can there even be a comparison between the Blink for stalkers and the Hydra range upgrade?? The first spells "omg cool new possibilities" the second... "well, I guess my hydras will shoot farther now". How about an activated ability which increases Hydra range by 2 (from 6 to 8) for like 8-10 seconds... that would open some nice play...
Each zerg unit is good at its own role and that's it. Which pretty much means no room for extra creativity and cute play.
3) Zerg has the lowest micromanagement need
Every T and P unit can be greately enhanced by microing it around. Either because it has an ability to use or because of its design. A few examples: Stalkers: high range, very fast can be used to pick off slower, lower range units like roaches or marines. Blink. Sentries: FF, GS, Hallucination Immortals: making them absorb the tank shots, immortal drops pheonix: picking up stuff, moving shot to keep out of range of mutas etc Marines: stim Marrauders: concussive shell kite, stim Viking: landing action Hellion: harrass Thor: Thor Drops etc etc etc
Lets see how zerg has to micro: you get to move your mutas around (which with how ridiculous Missile Turrets and Thors are you cant even do cute Muta Micro as in BW), you get to move your lings around for some surrounds, eventually rearrange your army when sending it into battle and maybe some infestor play.
All because zerg units are pretty sluggish and bland. Hydras - all zerg makes those, what can they do... well, they can shoot. How do you micro them? well... you a-move... and retreat when it doesnt work.
How about... I dunno... make overlords spill creep while they move so you can create a trail of creep which can serve as a creep highway for your units by moving your overlord in front of your army... and you would need to make sure the ovie is always in front, and the units must keep up as the creep will wear off in time (just a wild thing out the top of my head.)
4) Zerg has very limited harrass options.
A game that is nice to watch has a ton of action. Nobody wants to see a 30 minute game where both players macro up to the final battle. The idea that Zerg is a "reactionary race" is just another word for crap race. It is simply poor game design to leave a race take all the pounding and repell harrass after harrass just to win in the end-game by out-macro-ing its oponent. It bores the players and it bores the viewers.
It limits creativity and meta-game progression. We've seen the countless ways Terrans can open and transition while keeping the pressure up on its oponent. It strenghtens the idea that the race has a deep undiscovered potential, it makes it worth exploring and expanding. In today's state, the zerg we see, will continue to fend off attacks and macro up for 10 more years. Nothing much will change because there is not much room for it.
With the new game mechanics that allow perfectly zergling-tight walls, and roaches which are an absolute piece of crap slow unit, zerg is pretty much of no threat early on. Rushing to Mutalisks? No problem, 2 Missile Turrets with their absurd damage and low cost and you are safe. Hydralisks? Well, let me just put this here tank on my ledge and play TvZ - "The Tower Defense"...
How about a disruption web like ability on those corruptors, or some sneakier way to break those wall-ins at the ramp, like burrowed roaches moving underneath buildings or cliffs, or some sort of zergling catapult that would be fun... I dunno, something
There is a reason why in chess, it is White who is almost always favored to win. Because it has the initiative. Because Black is the reactionary race... think about it.
5)Zerg cannot abuse Terrain
Zerg has absolutely no unit that can abuse cliffs, ramps, ledges, chokes and all other crazy stuff map-makers will put in their maps. Therefore map makers really have to be careful about the maps they make. Races cannot be balanced in function of a map, it will just never work.
What about the opposite? Huge flat maps with empty spaces? Well, zerg will have trouble on those too, as hellions can enter ur base with ease and protoss early pushes will be much harder to defend. Which means that other races do fine on different kinds of maps, it is only zerg who will suffer because of maps with funky terrain.
Where's our Lurker or other unit that can abuse ramps and chokes and stuff? gone.. but wait all is good we have the baneling....
Anyway, I might continue this later on.. but I think I made sufficient points to counter your arguement.
Hit the nail on the head with pretty much all these points right there. But of course Terran needs its easy wins...
Jep, EXACTLY.
Zerg has no options to really be aggressive and it's harder to defend against harrassement because you can't really wall off and as soon as the opponent has Tanks/Colossi you'r pretty much forced to move out and sacrifice your Units.
It would be fine if they are a defensive macro race, but they should at least have a chance to defend their bases properly!
Zerg has no options to be agressive? No Zerg doesn't use their options to be aggressive. Burrowed infestors, Mutalisks, burrowed roaches, drops, nydus, creep harass, the list goes on. You just have to use the tools you have. And, more importantly, and I know people aren't going to want to hear this, but Zerg is the least finished race. Wait for the zerg expansion, and then see what options you have.
On July 27 2010 03:50 MythicalMage wrote: Zerg has no options to be agressive? No Zerg doesn't use their options to be aggressive. Burrowed infestors, Mutalisks, burrowed roaches, drops, nydus, creep harass, the list goes on. You just have to use the tools you have. And, more importantly, and I know people aren't going to want to hear this, but Zerg is the least finished race. Wait for the zerg expansion, and then see what options you have.
Why do you think Zerg players don't use their many options to be aggressive? It seems odd that Terran plyers use a million of them and Zerg don't use any. Rationally, it would seem that it's one of two possibilities: either the aggression options you have listed are not as viable as you think OR -- and this is key -- you're simply more intelligent than every other Zerg player.
Now, for the record, I'm with you on this. The latter option just feels far more realistic. Zerg players are a bunch of morons who don't have any idea on how to play the race. I can't speak for the rest of them, but if you were to make some toutorial videos on how to paly Zerg, I'd be first in line to buy them. With your knowledge, I could dominate the pro-scene.
Zerg don't use their options, normally, because they feel that "powering" is always better than being aggressive. All races have this to some extend; you build your magic unit composition and THEN you attack. Zerg has it worse than most due to the lack of units. That, and, as with pretty much every RTS game, people want to figure out the core, figure out what's the standard thing to do against Mech of 4 gate or what have you before exploring additional possibilities.
On July 27 2010 04:01 MythicalMage wrote: Zerg don't use their options, normally, because they feel that "powering" is always better than being aggressive. All races have this to some extend; you build your magic unit composition and THEN you attack. Zerg has it worse than most due to the lack of units. That, and, as with pretty much every RTS game, people want to figure out the core, figure out what's the standard thing to do against Mech of 4 gate or what have you before exploring additional possibilities.
Can you load up some games showing us ignorant Zerg player how to play the race? It'd be really helpful.
Lets be honest here, protoss has by far the highest mobility of all races.
Stalkers and chargelots runs as fast as drones everywhere. Add blink for ninja speed. Collusus are also extremely fast while being able to pass terrain. Only units that arent mobile are sentinels, immortals and HTs. Those units are just as slow as terran bio. On top of that they can warp in units anywhere they have power.
Terran, even bio is by far the slowest.
Zerg is in the middle, but are way more mobile on the defence with creep and shizzle.
Also someone talked about zerg weakness being unable to wall off... Well that would be kinda of stupid to do when your tier 1 units are roach and linx.
And someone said zerg cant be aggressive.. Go watch dimaga on day9 Kotb. However the way you can pump drones and then pump out an army insanely fast you are better off going fast expo and then just race for the 200/200 before the other player or do some sort of timing push.
I don't follow much of Zerg play, but you can look at Dimaga's game in the Day9 tournament as an example of an early aggressive zerg. You very very rarely see mid-late game aggression from zerg as the focus is always on out econ-ing your opponent. Also, your snarkiness is unnecessary and unhelpful.
On July 27 2010 03:50 MythicalMage wrote: Zerg has no options to be agressive? No Zerg doesn't use their options to be aggressive. Burrowed infestors, Mutalisks, burrowed roaches, drops, nydus, creep harass, the list goes on. You just have to use the tools you have. And, more importantly, and I know people aren't going to want to hear this, but Zerg is the least finished race. Wait for the zerg expansion, and then see what options you have.
I may have said it wrong. They don't have options early on like the other races (especially terran) and they can't really wall off. And if you are in defense mode, it's very very hard to become the aggressor because your opponent is always ahead. It's just extremely hard to defend early stuff like hellions and reapers and still be on top of your macro/tech to defend the push or air harrassement/drops.
If Zerg itself tries some early aggression with Baneling or Roaches, their economy will be extremely bad and they will be forced to win the game with that early aggression.
So, as Zerg -You are the worst at defending early aggression, -You are the one that relies the most on being able to defend early aggression and -You are the one with the least possibilitys to be aggressive early (in the sense of harrassing, not an all-in rush)
On July 27 2010 04:04 Armsved wrote: Lets be honest here, protoss has by far the highest mobility of all races.
Stalkers and chargelots runs as fast as drones everywhere. Add blink for ninja speed. Collusus are also extremely fast while being able to pass terrain. Only units that arent mobile are sentinels, immortals and HTs. Those units are just as slow as terran bio. On top of that they can warp in units anywhere they have power.
Terran, even bio is by far the slowest.
Zerg is in the middle, but are way more mobile on the defence with creep and shizzle.
Also someone talked about zerg weakness being unable to wall off... Well that would be kinda of stupid to do when your tier 1 units are roach and linx.
And someone said zerg cant be aggressive.. Go watch dimaga on day9 Kotb. However the way you can pump drones and then pump out an army insanely fast you are better off going fast expo and then just race for the 200/200 before the other player or do some sort of timing push.
I mentioned walling off because it gives Zerg a big scouting disadvantage in the early game. The race is built to be reactionary and before T2, Terran and Protoss can see what Zerg is donig and Zerg cannot see what Terran is doing. It's counter-intuative to the race's design.
I'd be interested in seeing some maps without the option to wall-off, forcing non-Zerg players to be very careful with their "Sim City." They can still protect their mineral line without cutting off the Zerg ability to scout. It's unfair that Zerg can be kept in the dark due solely to map design, not gameplay design.
Kinda. I feel that zerg CAN sacrifice their economy early on, get some control of the game, and then double expand or something. There are tons of options. As for defense, speedlings on creep move at the speed of light, so I don't REALLY see that as a concern. And you can look at Dimaga's games, as mentioned above for an example of early aggression.
On July 27 2010 04:04 Armsved wrote: Lets be honest here, protoss has by far the highest mobility of all races.
Stalkers and chargelots runs as fast as drones everywhere. Add blink for ninja speed. Collusus are also extremely fast while being able to pass terrain. Only units that arent mobile are sentinels, immortals and HTs. Those units are just as slow as terran bio. On top of that they can warp in units anywhere they have power.
Terran, even bio is by far the slowest.
Zerg is in the middle, but are way more mobile on the defence with creep and shizzle.
Also someone talked about zerg weakness being unable to wall off... Well that would be kinda of stupid to do when your tier 1 units are roach and linx.
And someone said zerg cant be aggressive.. Go watch dimaga on day9 Kotb. However the way you can pump drones and then pump out an army insanely fast you are better off going fast expo and then just race for the 200/200 before the other player or do some sort of timing push.
I mentioned walling off because it gives Zerg a big scouting disadvantage in the early game. The race is built to be reactionary and before T2, Terran and Protoss can see what Zerg is donig and Zerg cannot see what Terran is doing. It's counter-intuative to the race's design. I'd be interested in seeing some maps without the option to wall-off, forcing non-Zerg players to be very careful with their "Sim City." They can still protect their mineral line without cutting off the Zerg ability to scout. It's unfair that Zerg can be kept in the dark due solely to map design, not gameplay design.
But zerg has the most accessible, and arguably the cheapest scout in the overlord. Morph it into an overseer, and you can even stop their production for a time. Terrans wall off because speedlings will literally end the game if they don't. The same can be said for Protoss. And if they don't wall well enough, a few banelings can be GG.
On July 27 2010 04:10 MythicalMage wrote: Kinda. I feel that zerg CAN sacrifice their economy early on, get some control of the game, and then double expand or something. There are tons of options. As for defense, speedlings on creep move at the speed of light, so I don't REALLY see that as a concern. And you can look at Dimaga's games, as mentioned above for an example of early aggression.
Dimaga's play in the King of the Beta failed miserably for the most part, so why would anyone use that as a role model? And I agree that Zerg can gain early map control and expand faster than Terran or Protoss, but they're doing so in the dark. Expanding costs a lot of minerals, forcing you to delay tech. If Zerg fast expands and then has to deal with Hellions and Banshees shortly after, they're put at a big disadvantage since they're not able to use the larvae for drones anyway.
The point is fast expanding with no knowledge of what your opponent is doing is russian roulette.
Why do you refere to Dimaga all the time? He lost pretty much all important games recently. The biggest problem with zerg is simply their straight up fighting power in mid game. Many people argue that you need to nydus/burrow/drop blah....
But if the terra deathball attacks, you have exactly 2 choices: - base trade - fight head on
Whatever you choose, you'll be in a horrible position. Thats also why many zerg prefere a straight up macro game instead of fancy harassing styles, because you simply get crushed the moment your harassment fails, because you invested so much into burrow upgrades/mutas/nydus/drop.
On July 27 2010 04:12 MythicalMage wrote: But zerg has the most accessible, and arguably the cheapest scout in the overlord. Morph it into an overseer, and you can even stop their production for a time. Terrans wall off because speedlings will literally end the game if they don't. The same can be said for Protoss. And if they don't wall well enough, a few banelings can be GG.
As I wrote in what you quoted, Zerg don't gain that scouting ability until T2 -- it's before that there's an issue. Also, I disagree about Speeding = gg if there's no wall-off. Players would be forced to make tighter bases with static defense in fear of mass zergling, which is a better game mechanic that making speedlings irrelivant.
On July 27 2010 04:10 MythicalMage wrote: Kinda. I feel that zerg CAN sacrifice their economy early on, get some control of the game, and then double expand or something. There are tons of options. As for defense, speedlings on creep move at the speed of light, so I don't REALLY see that as a concern. And you can look at Dimaga's games, as mentioned above for an example of early aggression.
Dimaga's play in the King of the Beta failed miserably for the most part, so why would anyone use that as a role model? And I agree that Zerg can gain early map control and expand faster than Terran or Protoss, but they're doing so in the dark. Expanding costs a lot of minerals, forcing you to delay tech. If Zerg fast expands and then has to deal with Hellions and Banshees shortly after, they're put at a big disadvantage since they're not able to use the larvae for drones anyway.
The point is fast expanding with no knowledge of what your opponent is doing is russian roulette.
So what it failed? I saw a game recently where LzGamer tried to fast expand and it failed. Does that mean that all Terran fast expands are bad? Of course not. And I've already discussed scouting.
On July 27 2010 04:05 MythicalMage wrote: I don't follow much of Zerg play, but you can look at Dimaga's game in the Day9 tournament as an example of an early aggressive zerg. You very very rarely see mid-late game aggression from zerg as the focus is always on out econ-ing your opponent. Also, your snarkiness is unnecessary and unhelpful.
good example, I guess you mean his "totally getting schooled" aggression for a strong 0-2 in 20 mins against ITR? Or maybe the super versatile 0-2 against qxc, all thanks to zerg aggression? As a zerg you have to do damage if you're gonna be aggressive. Not like protoss or terran, where 2 zealots trade for 2 drones and your happy about the exchange. With mules and chronoboosted probes, you are falling far, far behind unless you do a shitton of damage with your early units. Sure, I've used the builds dimaga uses and I'm very open to doing baneling busts etc. I like being aggressive. Sometimes it even works, the early roaches for example, outright kills thorship rush. It is however pretty close to an allin. If you don't get into the terran base with the roaches you better type out, there is no coming back since you've been living off 16 drones until 5 mins into the game.
Edit: My biggest beef with this game atm is however the fact that out of my ground units exactly 2 can hit air. Queen and hydra? Blizzard seriously wants to make me fight air units with units who are slow as a reaver off creep? Thanks, that way a terran will never lose a medivac, ever as long as he won't be putting it in my base. At least give me my scourges back if my ground AA has to suck that much :S
And of course, that interview with the blizzard guy who said that "maybe terran units are too specialized, they might counter some things too hard". If my units were as specialized as the thor I would jump around in joy. You say that the thor is specialized at killing mutas? lucky me that it doesn't like demolish every ground unit I can field apart from lings and ultras (assuming possiblity for the fat ultras to make sure all of them hits).
To be honest, I'm really looking forward to play some again to try to see if I can come up with a way to beat a good terran, and I'm eagerly awaiting the first month or two of tournaments to see what my fellow zergs can come up with. My feeling right now however is that this matchup is damaged and is actually gonna get broken when terrans start to utilize their entire arsenal. Hopefully time will prove me wrong.
On July 27 2010 04:12 MythicalMage wrote: But zerg has the most accessible, and arguably the cheapest scout in the overlord. Morph it into an overseer, and you can even stop their production for a time. Terrans wall off because speedlings will literally end the game if they don't. The same can be said for Protoss. And if they don't wall well enough, a few banelings can be GG.
As I wrote in what you quoted, Zerg don't gain that scouting ability until T2 -- it's before that there's an issue. Also, I disagree about Speeding = gg if there's no wall-off. Players would be forced to make tighter bases with static defense in fear of mass zergling, which is a better game mechanic that making speedlings irrelivant.
So you tech to lair before you get an overlord? Cool strategy. As for speedlings, I feel that once they deal significant damage, it at least equalizes the game. And the GG bit was more for banelings and so on.
On July 27 2010 04:05 MythicalMage wrote: I don't follow much of Zerg play, but you can look at Dimaga's game in the Day9 tournament as an example of an early aggressive zerg. You very very rarely see mid-late game aggression from zerg as the focus is always on out econ-ing your opponent. Also, your snarkiness is unnecessary and unhelpful.
Dimaga vs Qxc game 1: Roach rush, fails horribly without any harassment Dimaga vs Qxc game 2: Tries to defend against hellions, no harassment to speak of Dimaga vs IntoTheRainbow game 1: Roach rush, fails without any harassment Dimaga vs IntoTheRainbow game 1: Banshee harassment.. Dimaga vs Whitera: Woho! All in baneling against FE Protoss...
Give me the link to this early aggressive zerg replay please, it would make it much easier to find. I might be watching wrong tournament.
Dont use something as an example for how Z should play if it didnt work.
On July 27 2010 04:05 MythicalMage wrote: I don't follow much of Zerg play, but you can look at Dimaga's game in the Day9 tournament as an example of an early aggressive zerg. You very very rarely see mid-late game aggression from zerg as the focus is always on out econ-ing your opponent. Also, your snarkiness is unnecessary and unhelpful.
Dimaga vs Qxc game 1: Roach rush, fails horribly without any harassment Dimaga vs Qxc game 2: Tries to defend against hellions, no harassment to speak of Dimaga vs IntoTheRainbow game 1: Roach rush, fails without any harassment Dimaga vs IntoTheRainbow game 1: Banshee harassment.. Dimaga vs Whitera: Woho! All in baneling against FE Protoss...
Give me the link to this early aggressive zerg replay please, it would make it much easier to find. I might be watching wrong tournament.
I'm not saying the same thing for three time in a row.
On July 27 2010 04:12 MythicalMage wrote: But zerg has the most accessible, and arguably the cheapest scout in the overlord. Morph it into an overseer, and you can even stop their production for a time. Terrans wall off because speedlings will literally end the game if they don't. The same can be said for Protoss. And if they don't wall well enough, a few banelings can be GG.
As I wrote in what you quoted, Zerg don't gain that scouting ability until T2 -- it's before that there's an issue. Also, I disagree about Speeding = gg if there's no wall-off. Players would be forced to make tighter bases with static defense in fear of mass zergling, which is a better game mechanic that making speedlings irrelivant.
So you tech to lair before you get an overlord? Cool strategy. As for speedlings, I feel that once they deal significant damage, it at least equalizes the game. And the GG bit was more for banelings and so on.
You cannot effectively scout a player with an Overlord that doesn't have the speed upgrade. I hate to make assumptions, but I'm guessing you don't play Zerg...
On July 27 2010 04:25 Graven wrote: You cannot effectively scout a player with an Overlord that doesn't have the speed upgrade. I hate to make assumptions, but I'm guessing you don't play Zerg...
I didn't say AN overlord. You can scout pretty effectively with two, in my experience. They can't have anti air units all over their base, and if they do, you can just push their front and so on. But, if I'm wrong, let me know. I haven't played zerg in a while, what with the beta being down.
On July 27 2010 04:10 MythicalMage wrote: Kinda. I feel that zerg CAN sacrifice their economy early on, get some control of the game, and then double expand or something. There are tons of options. As for defense, speedlings on creep move at the speed of light, so I don't REALLY see that as a concern. And you can look at Dimaga's games, as mentioned above for an example of early aggression.
Dimaga's play in the King of the Beta failed miserably for the most part, so why would anyone use that as a role model? And I agree that Zerg can gain early map control and expand faster than Terran or Protoss, but they're doing so in the dark. Expanding costs a lot of minerals, forcing you to delay tech. If Zerg fast expands and then has to deal with Hellions and Banshees shortly after, they're put at a big disadvantage since they're not able to use the larvae for drones anyway.
The point is fast expanding with no knowledge of what your opponent is doing is russian roulette.
So what it failed? I saw a game recently where LzGamer tried to fast expand and it failed. Does that mean that all Terran fast expands are bad? Of course not. And I've already discussed scouting.
I wouldnt use a replay where something failed horribly as an example on how to play a race. This might confuse people..
Problem with overlord: They cost 100 minerals and 1 larva. Losing them hurts. If you try to scout with it against decent Terran you will lose one, thought sometimes it is worth it..
Why bother discussing anything with MythicalMage when he admitted he doesn't know anything about zerg playstyle. He makes suggestions without knowing what he's talking about and you continue to reply to him?
On July 27 2010 04:28 DoomFox wrote: Why bother discussing anything with MythicalMage when he admitted he doesn't know anything about zerg playstyle. He makes suggestions without knowing what he's talking about and you continue to reply to him?
Where did I admit this? The core idea that Zerg can be aggressive is true, regardless of examples.
On July 27 2010 04:25 Graven wrote: You cannot effectively scout a player with an Overlord that doesn't have the speed upgrade. I hate to make assumptions, but I'm guessing you don't play Zerg...
I didn't say AN overlord. You can scout pretty effectively with two, in my experience. They can't have anti air units all over their base, and if they do, you can just push their front and so on. But, if I'm wrong, let me know. I haven't played zerg in a while, what with the beta being down.
I'm not sure if you're trying to be difficult, but I'll remain cordial...
You can use two Overlord's...hell you can use three to be even safer. However, they need to be put in place several minutes before (crossing the map with an unupgraded Overlord takes time) and you need to hope the Overlord about to reveal the needed info isn't killed first. 2-3 Marines kill an Overlord VERY quickly, so to throw 200 minerals, several minutes of positioning, and two larvae away, all for a CHANCE at reveallnig what your opponent is doing isn't ideal.
On July 27 2010 04:28 DoomFox wrote: Why bother discussing anything with MythicalMage when he admitted he doesn't know anything about zerg playstyle. He makes suggestions without knowing what he's talking about and you continue to reply to him?
Where did I admit this? The core idea that Zerg can be aggressive is true, regardless of examples.
Just like the core idea of earth is flat is true without any proof?
On July 27 2010 04:12 MythicalMage wrote: But zerg has the most accessible, and arguably the cheapest scout in the overlord. Morph it into an overseer, and you can even stop their production for a time. Terrans wall off because speedlings will literally end the game if they don't. The same can be said for Protoss. And if they don't wall well enough, a few banelings can be GG.
As I wrote in what you quoted, Zerg don't gain that scouting ability until T2 -- it's before that there's an issue. Also, I disagree about Speeding = gg if there's no wall-off. Players would be forced to make tighter bases with static defense in fear of mass zergling, which is a better game mechanic that making speedlings irrelivant.
So you tech to lair before you get an overlord? Cool strategy. As for speedlings, I feel that once they deal significant damage, it at least equalizes the game. And the GG bit was more for banelings and so on.
You cannot effectively scout a player with an Overlord that doesn't have the speed upgrade. I hate to make assumptions, but I'm guessing you don't play Zerg...
Thats maybe true on some maps, but on most maps you can do it. Kulra ravine and blistering sand you can have an overlord looking over the terran choke all the time (which is plenty. A good zerg wont need to know more than wether its techlab or reactor to have an idea of whats going on). On steppes of war you can easily suicide an overlord in from either side even if they are slow, same with metalpolis. On lost temple you can watch the expansion choke at all time and ofc suicide from the back. Yes they will die if he gets vikings or phoenixes, but then you know that.
And ofc. you can always send a zergling to the other players choke to see his unit composition.
But last and not least, as soon as the wall of the terran or toss base is up, is the same time you wont be scouting some decent zerg with a worker due to good linx/queen micro.
Its just, many zergs forget to do those things, since you have to think about it in advance. Look at Idra's overlord placement, its soooo good. And he will constantly be sending 1 zergling in to see what you have at your choke.
On July 27 2010 04:25 Graven wrote: You cannot effectively scout a player with an Overlord that doesn't have the speed upgrade. I hate to make assumptions, but I'm guessing you don't play Zerg...
I didn't say AN overlord. You can scout pretty effectively with two, in my experience. They can't have anti air units all over their base, and if they do, you can just push their front and so on. But, if I'm wrong, let me know. I haven't played zerg in a while, what with the beta being down.
I'm not sure if you're trying to be difficult, but I'll remain cordial...
You can use two Overlord's...hell you can use three to be even safer. However, they need to be put in place several minutes before (crossing the map with an unupgraded Overlord takes time) and you need to hope the Overlord about to reveal the needed info isn't killed first. 2-3 Marines kill an Overlord VERY quickly, so to throw 200 minerals, several minutes of positioning, and two larvae away, all for a CHANCE at reveallnig what your opponent is doing isn't ideal.
Fair enough. Though, it's still not uncommon for the first hundred gas to go to lair, and if not the first, then the second hundred gas. It's one of the flaws in the game, sure. Just like protoss only has one means of detection. EDIT: And I'm not trying to be difficult. =]
On July 27 2010 04:25 Graven wrote: You cannot effectively scout a player with an Overlord that doesn't have the speed upgrade. I hate to make assumptions, but I'm guessing you don't play Zerg...
I didn't say AN overlord. You can scout pretty effectively with two, in my experience. They can't have anti air units all over their base, and if they do, you can just push their front and so on. But, if I'm wrong, let me know. I haven't played zerg in a while, what with the beta being down.
I'm not sure if you're trying to be difficult, but I'll remain cordial...
You can use two Overlord's...hell you can use three to be even safer. However, they need to be put in place several minutes before (crossing the map with an unupgraded Overlord takes time) and you need to hope the Overlord about to reveal the needed info isn't killed first. 2-3 Marines kill an Overlord VERY quickly, so to throw 200 minerals, several minutes of positioning, and two larvae away, all for a CHANCE at reveallnig what your opponent is doing isn't ideal.
Fair enough. Though, it's still not uncommon for the first hundred gas to go to lair, and if not the first, then the second hundred gas. It's one of the flaws in the game, sure. Just like protoss only has one means of detection. EDIT: And I'm not trying to be difficult. =]
Well, against Terran, typically the first hundred gas needs to go into Zergling Speed or one risks getting dominated by Hellions. Even if a Zerg player wanted to use the first hundred gas on Lair tech, they still need to wait for their Queen to pop out, so there's a built in delay regardless.
As for Protoss detection...huh? Every race has only one unit with detection and one static defensive building that detects. Terran happen to have scan as well. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, especially since the Observer is perhaps the best unit in the game.
On July 27 2010 04:25 Graven wrote: You cannot effectively scout a player with an Overlord that doesn't have the speed upgrade. I hate to make assumptions, but I'm guessing you don't play Zerg...
I didn't say AN overlord. You can scout pretty effectively with two, in my experience. They can't have anti air units all over their base, and if they do, you can just push their front and so on. But, if I'm wrong, let me know. I haven't played zerg in a while, what with the beta being down.
I'm not sure if you're trying to be difficult, but I'll remain cordial...
You can use two Overlord's...hell you can use three to be even safer. However, they need to be put in place several minutes before (crossing the map with an unupgraded Overlord takes time) and you need to hope the Overlord about to reveal the needed info isn't killed first. 2-3 Marines kill an Overlord VERY quickly, so to throw 200 minerals, several minutes of positioning, and two larvae away, all for a CHANCE at reveallnig what your opponent is doing isn't ideal.
Fair enough. Though, it's still not uncommon for the first hundred gas to go to lair, and if not the first, then the second hundred gas. It's one of the flaws in the game, sure. Just like protoss only has one means of detection. EDIT: And I'm not trying to be difficult. =]
Well, against Terran, typically the first hundred gas needs to go into Zergling Speed or one risks getting dominated by Hellions. Even if a Zerg player wanted to use the first hundred gas on Lair tech, they still need to wait for their Queen to pop out, so there's a built in delay regardless.
As for Protoss detection...huh? Every race has only one unit with detection and one static defensive building that detects. Terran happen to have scan as well. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, especially since the Observer is perhaps the best unit in the game.
Terran has scan and raven and turrets. Zerg has overseer, which only requires lair. Protoss require going into robo just to get the ability to survive without cannons. So either a forge or a robo. But that's neither here nor there.
On July 27 2010 04:39 MythicalMage wrote: If DIMAGA tried it, that means that it works at least some of the time. It's not like he's going into a big tournament looking to lose.
I don't think you understand that what Dimaga was doing was an all-in play and not "aggression". Aggression lets you transition into another play relatively safely regardless of the outcome of your aggressive attack.
If Dimaga stopped attacking after his initial zerglings/banelings he LOSES. Look how much gas he spent on all those expensive banelings all the while being on 1 gas and far behind in workers. His opponent was already saturated and on 2 gas and way ahead in tech/expansion. If he stops attacking he cannot possibly catch up in economy nor tech.
If you're suggesting using Dimaga as an example of aggression then you have already failed and don't understand what everyone is talking about when they say "aggression".
On July 27 2010 04:39 MythicalMage wrote: If DIMAGA tried it, that means that it works at least some of the time. It's not like he's going into a big tournament looking to lose.
I don't think you understand that what Dimaga was doing was an all-in play and not "aggression". Aggression lets you transition into another play relatively safely regardless of the outcome of your aggressive attack.
If Dimaga stopped attacking after his initial zerglings/banelings he LOSES. Look how much gas he spent on all those expensive banelings all the while being on 1 gas. His opponent was already saturated and on 2 gas and way ahead in tech/expansion. If he stops attacking he cannot possibly catch up in economy nor tech.
If you're suggesting using Dimaga as an example of aggression then you have already failed and don't understand what everyone is talking about when they say "aggression".
I was referring more to his roach play. In fact, in one of his games against WhiteRa I think, on Blistering Sands, he expanded a bunch.
On July 27 2010 04:25 Graven wrote: You cannot effectively scout a player with an Overlord that doesn't have the speed upgrade. I hate to make assumptions, but I'm guessing you don't play Zerg...
I didn't say AN overlord. You can scout pretty effectively with two, in my experience. They can't have anti air units all over their base, and if they do, you can just push their front and so on. But, if I'm wrong, let me know. I haven't played zerg in a while, what with the beta being down.
I'm not sure if you're trying to be difficult, but I'll remain cordial...
You can use two Overlord's...hell you can use three to be even safer. However, they need to be put in place several minutes before (crossing the map with an unupgraded Overlord takes time) and you need to hope the Overlord about to reveal the needed info isn't killed first. 2-3 Marines kill an Overlord VERY quickly, so to throw 200 minerals, several minutes of positioning, and two larvae away, all for a CHANCE at reveallnig what your opponent is doing isn't ideal.
Fair enough. Though, it's still not uncommon for the first hundred gas to go to lair, and if not the first, then the second hundred gas. It's one of the flaws in the game, sure. Just like protoss only has one means of detection. EDIT: And I'm not trying to be difficult. =]
Well, against Terran, typically the first hundred gas needs to go into Zergling Speed or one risks getting dominated by Hellions. Even if a Zerg player wanted to use the first hundred gas on Lair tech, they still need to wait for their Queen to pop out, so there's a built in delay regardless.
As for Protoss detection...huh? Every race has only one unit with detection and one static defensive building that detects. Terran happen to have scan as well. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, especially since the Observer is perhaps the best unit in the game.
Terran has scan and raven and turrets. Zerg has overseer, which only requires lair. Protoss require going into robo just to get the ability to survive without cannons. So either a forge or a robo. But that's neither here nor there.
Yes, but the unit can fly and is cloaked. I'd gladly trade the Overseer for an Observer at the cost of another tech building. Again though...what is the point of this tangent?
On July 27 2010 04:25 Graven wrote: You cannot effectively scout a player with an Overlord that doesn't have the speed upgrade. I hate to make assumptions, but I'm guessing you don't play Zerg...
I didn't say AN overlord. You can scout pretty effectively with two, in my experience. They can't have anti air units all over their base, and if they do, you can just push their front and so on. But, if I'm wrong, let me know. I haven't played zerg in a while, what with the beta being down.
I'm not sure if you're trying to be difficult, but I'll remain cordial...
You can use two Overlord's...hell you can use three to be even safer. However, they need to be put in place several minutes before (crossing the map with an unupgraded Overlord takes time) and you need to hope the Overlord about to reveal the needed info isn't killed first. 2-3 Marines kill an Overlord VERY quickly, so to throw 200 minerals, several minutes of positioning, and two larvae away, all for a CHANCE at reveallnig what your opponent is doing isn't ideal.
Fair enough. Though, it's still not uncommon for the first hundred gas to go to lair, and if not the first, then the second hundred gas. It's one of the flaws in the game, sure. Just like protoss only has one means of detection. EDIT: And I'm not trying to be difficult. =]
Well, against Terran, typically the first hundred gas needs to go into Zergling Speed or one risks getting dominated by Hellions. Even if a Zerg player wanted to use the first hundred gas on Lair tech, they still need to wait for their Queen to pop out, so there's a built in delay regardless.
As for Protoss detection...huh? Every race has only one unit with detection and one static defensive building that detects. Terran happen to have scan as well. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, especially since the Observer is perhaps the best unit in the game.
Terran has scan and raven and turrets. Zerg has overseer, which only requires lair. Protoss require going into robo just to get the ability to survive without cannons. So either a forge or a robo. But that's neither here nor there.
Yes, but the unit can fly and is cloaked. I'd gladly trade the Overseer for an Observer at the cost of another tech building. Again though...what is the point of this tangent?
I was just trying to point out what seemed a flaw in the game development, an imbalance if you will.
On July 27 2010 04:50 zTz wrote: Lol @ argument...
Anyways, for all you Blizzard flamers and "OP Terran/UP Zerg" screamers out there: this is the Terran package, next comes Zerg, then Protoss. GG.
Thanks for this thread, there is nothing wrong with Zerg, Blizzard is a lot smarter than the angry preteen gamers who call them idiots.
Are you implying that Blizzard purposely intended for Terran to be the strongest race because the Terran campaign is being released? And then did you actually follow that up by insulting other peoples' intelligence? Really?
On July 27 2010 04:50 zTz wrote: Lol @ argument...
Anyways, for all you Blizzard flamers and "OP Terran/UP Zerg" screamers out there: this is the Terran package, next comes Zerg, then Protoss. GG.
Thanks for this thread, there is nothing wrong with Zerg, Blizzard is a lot smarter than the angry preteen gamers who call them idiots.
Are you implying that Blizzard purposely intended for Terran to be the strongest race because the Terran campaign is being released? And then did you actually follow that up by insulting other peoples' intelligence? Really?
On July 27 2010 04:50 zTz wrote: Lol @ argument...
Anyways, for all you Blizzard flamers and "OP Terran/UP Zerg" screamers out there: this is the Terran package, next comes Zerg, then Protoss. GG.
Thanks for this thread, there is nothing wrong with Zerg, Blizzard is a lot smarter than the angry preteen gamers who call them idiots.
Are you implying that Blizzard purposely intended for Terran to be the strongest race because the Terran campaign is being released? And then did you actually follow that up by insulting other peopless intelligence? Really?
Really?
No. I'm fairly certain he's implying that Zerg is not "complete."
On July 27 2010 04:50 zTz wrote: Lol @ argument...
Anyways, for all you Blizzard flamers and "OP Terran/UP Zerg" screamers out there: this is the Terran package, next comes Zerg, then Protoss. GG.
Thanks for this thread, there is nothing wrong with Zerg, Blizzard is a lot smarter than the angry preteen gamers who call them idiots.
Do you have a short memory? All one has to do is to look at the Phoenix and it's "moving shot" mechanic to know that Blizzard isn't infallible and is capable of not understanding their own game.
On July 27 2010 04:50 zTz wrote: Lol @ argument...
Anyways, for all you Blizzard flamers and "OP Terran/UP Zerg" screamers out there: this is the Terran package, next comes Zerg, then Protoss. GG.
Thanks for this thread, there is nothing wrong with Zerg, Blizzard is a lot smarter than the angry preteen gamers who call them idiots.
Are you implying that Blizzard purposely intended for Terran to be the strongest race because the Terran campaign is being released? And then did you actually follow that up by insulting other peopless intelligence? Really?
Really?
No. I'm fairly certain he's implying that Zerg is not "complete."
Under that logic, no race is complete. It's not as if only Zerg is gonig to receive new units in the first expansion. This entire argument is painfully stupid.
On July 27 2010 04:50 zTz wrote: Lol @ argument...
Anyways, for all you Blizzard flamers and "OP Terran/UP Zerg" screamers out there: this is the Terran package, next comes Zerg, then Protoss. GG.
Thanks for this thread, there is nothing wrong with Zerg, Blizzard is a lot smarter than the angry preteen gamers who call them idiots.
Are you implying that Blizzard purposely intended for Terran to be the strongest race because the Terran campaign is being released? And then did you actually follow that up by insulting other peopless intelligence? Really?
Really?
No. I'm fairly certain he's implying that Zerg is not "complete."
Under that logic, no race is complete. It's not as if only Zerg is gonig to receive new units in the first expansion. This entire argument is painfully stupid.
I'm fairly certain Zerg will get new units in the Zerg expansion, and the same for Protoss. Just like every expansion that Blizzard has released for it's RTS games has given new units.
Like I said, there's no point discussing anything if they don't understand what they're talking about. Hopefully somebody who can put a rational thought together can turn this thread around.
On July 27 2010 04:25 Graven wrote: You cannot effectively scout a player with an Overlord that doesn't have the speed upgrade. I hate to make assumptions, but I'm guessing you don't play Zerg...
I didn't say AN overlord. You can scout pretty effectively with two, in my experience. They can't have anti air units all over their base, and if they do, you can just push their front and so on. But, if I'm wrong, let me know. I haven't played zerg in a while, what with the beta being down.
I'm not sure if you're trying to be difficult, but I'll remain cordial...
You can use two Overlord's...hell you can use three to be even safer. However, they need to be put in place several minutes before (crossing the map with an unupgraded Overlord takes time) and you need to hope the Overlord about to reveal the needed info isn't killed first. 2-3 Marines kill an Overlord VERY quickly, so to throw 200 minerals, several minutes of positioning, and two larvae away, all for a CHANCE at reveallnig what your opponent is doing isn't ideal.
Fair enough. Though, it's still not uncommon for the first hundred gas to go to lair, and if not the first, then the second hundred gas. It's one of the flaws in the game, sure. Just like protoss only has one means of detection. EDIT: And I'm not trying to be difficult. =]
dont listen to him. hes argueing that slow ovi scouts are worthless .yeah evryone that did that since 10 years (including evry pro and sc2) obviously has no clue.
evryone will tell you that sacing overlords is totally standart and recommended. if you dont already somewhat know whats going on from running 1-2 lings up his ramp or having a decently fast lair for a overseer intime.
dont let him talk you out of smart plays just because in his world Z is the worst race evurr !
On July 27 2010 04:50 zTz wrote: Lol @ argument...
Anyways, for all you Blizzard flamers and "OP Terran/UP Zerg" screamers out there: this is the Terran package, next comes Zerg, then Protoss. GG.
Thanks for this thread, there is nothing wrong with Zerg, Blizzard is a lot smarter than the angry preteen gamers who call them idiots.
Are you implying that Blizzard purposely intended for Terran to be the strongest race because the Terran campaign is being released? And then did you actually follow that up by insulting other peopless intelligence? Really?
Really?
No. I'm fairly certain he's implying that Zerg is not "complete."
Under that logic, no race is complete. It's not as if only Zerg is gonig to receive new units in the first expansion. This entire argument is painfully stupid.
I'm fairly certain Zerg will get new units in the Zerg expansion, and the same for Protoss. Just like every expansion that Blizzard has released for it's RTS games has given new units.
On July 27 2010 04:57 DoomFox wrote: Like I said, there's no point discussing anything if they don't understand what they're talking about. Hopefully somebody who can put a rational thought together can turn this thread around.
On July 27 2010 04:25 Graven wrote: You cannot effectively scout a player with an Overlord that doesn't have the speed upgrade. I hate to make assumptions, but I'm guessing you don't play Zerg...
I didn't say AN overlord. You can scout pretty effectively with two, in my experience. They can't have anti air units all over their base, and if they do, you can just push their front and so on. But, if I'm wrong, let me know. I haven't played zerg in a while, what with the beta being down.
I'm not sure if you're trying to be difficult, but I'll remain cordial...
You can use two Overlord's...hell you can use three to be even safer. However, they need to be put in place several minutes before (crossing the map with an unupgraded Overlord takes time) and you need to hope the Overlord about to reveal the needed info isn't killed first. 2-3 Marines kill an Overlord VERY quickly, so to throw 200 minerals, several minutes of positioning, and two larvae away, all for a CHANCE at reveallnig what your opponent is doing isn't ideal.
Fair enough. Though, it's still not uncommon for the first hundred gas to go to lair, and if not the first, then the second hundred gas. It's one of the flaws in the game, sure. Just like protoss only has one means of detection. EDIT: And I'm not trying to be difficult. =]
dont listen to him. hes argueing that slow ovi scouts are worthless .yeah evryone that did that since 10 years (including evry pro and sc2) obviously has no clue.
evryone will tell you that sacing overlords is totally standart and recommended. if you dont already somewhat know whats going on from running 1-2 lings up his ramp or having a decently fast lair for a overseer intime.
dont let him talk you out of smart plays just because in his world Z is the worst race evurr !
had to jump in...
I do scout with slow Overlords and was not suggesting not to. This thread is painful. There's no chance any of the people arguing against Zerg being UP play Zerg.
On July 27 2010 04:50 zTz wrote: Lol @ argument...
Anyways, for all you Blizzard flamers and "OP Terran/UP Zerg" screamers out there: this is the Terran package, next comes Zerg, then Protoss. GG.
Thanks for this thread, there is nothing wrong with Zerg, Blizzard is a lot smarter than the angry preteen gamers who call them idiots.
Are you implying that Blizzard purposely intended for Terran to be the strongest race because the Terran campaign is being released? And then did you actually follow that up by insulting other peopless intelligence? Really?
Really?
No. I'm fairly certain he's implying that Zerg is not "complete."
Under that logic, no race is complete. It's not as if only Zerg is gonig to receive new units in the first expansion. This entire argument is painfully stupid.
I'm fairly certain Zerg will get new units in the Zerg expansion, and the same for Protoss. Just like every expansion that Blizzard has released for it's RTS games has given new units.
Exactly...so wtf are you aguing?
Before Brood War, Starcraft was almost unplayable in a competitive sense. The same with Warcraft 3 before Frozen Throne. I'm not saying SC2 is like that, I think it's amazingly playable and so on, but I think that the game is far from finished. I think it's pretty damn near balanced, at least pretty damn close to Brood War's balance, and I think that, if you want more units or versatility, just wait for your expansion.
On July 27 2010 04:25 Graven wrote: You cannot effectively scout a player with an Overlord that doesn't have the speed upgrade. I hate to make assumptions, but I'm guessing you don't play Zerg...
I didn't say AN overlord. You can scout pretty effectively with two, in my experience. They can't have anti air units all over their base, and if they do, you can just push their front and so on. But, if I'm wrong, let me know. I haven't played zerg in a while, what with the beta being down.
I'm not sure if you're trying to be difficult, but I'll remain cordial...
You can use two Overlord's...hell you can use three to be even safer. However, they need to be put in place several minutes before (crossing the map with an unupgraded Overlord takes time) and you need to hope the Overlord about to reveal the needed info isn't killed first. 2-3 Marines kill an Overlord VERY quickly, so to throw 200 minerals, several minutes of positioning, and two larvae away, all for a CHANCE at reveallnig what your opponent is doing isn't ideal.
Fair enough. Though, it's still not uncommon for the first hundred gas to go to lair, and if not the first, then the second hundred gas. It's one of the flaws in the game, sure. Just like protoss only has one means of detection. EDIT: And I'm not trying to be difficult. =]
dont listen to him. hes argueing that slow ovi scouts are worthless .yeah evryone that did that since 10 years (including evry pro and sc2) obviously has no clue.
evryone will tell you that sacing overlords is totally standart and recommended. if you dont already somewhat know whats going on from running 1-2 lings up his ramp or having a decently fast lair for a overseer intime.
dont let him talk you out of smart plays just because in his world Z is the worst race evurr !
had to jump in...
I do scout with slow Overlords and was not suggesting not to. This thread is painful. There's no chance any of the people arguing against Zerg being UP play Zerg.
What does that have to do with anything? Sure, I may not know all the details about the race, but I can comment on what I've seen professional players do. Whether or not that applies to casual gamers is another topic entirely.
On July 27 2010 04:25 Graven wrote: You cannot effectively scout a player with an Overlord that doesn't have the speed upgrade. I hate to make assumptions, but I'm guessing you don't play Zerg...
I didn't say AN overlord. You can scout pretty effectively with two, in my experience. They can't have anti air units all over their base, and if they do, you can just push their front and so on. But, if I'm wrong, let me know. I haven't played zerg in a while, what with the beta being down.
I'm not sure if you're trying to be difficult, but I'll remain cordial...
You can use two Overlord's...hell you can use three to be even safer. However, they need to be put in place several minutes before (crossing the map with an unupgraded Overlord takes time) and you need to hope the Overlord about to reveal the needed info isn't killed first. 2-3 Marines kill an Overlord VERY quickly, so to throw 200 minerals, several minutes of positioning, and two larvae away, all for a CHANCE at reveallnig what your opponent is doing isn't ideal.
Fair enough. Though, it's still not uncommon for the first hundred gas to go to lair, and if not the first, then the second hundred gas. It's one of the flaws in the game, sure. Just like protoss only has one means of detection. EDIT: And I'm not trying to be difficult. =]
dont listen to him. hes argueing that slow ovi scouts are worthless .yeah evryone that did that since 10 years (including evry pro and sc2) obviously has no clue.
evryone will tell you that sacing overlords is totally standart and recommended. if you dont already somewhat know whats going on from running 1-2 lings up his ramp or having a decently fast lair for a overseer intime.
dont let him talk you out of smart plays just because in his world Z is the worst race evurr !
had to jump in...
I do scout with slow Overlords and was not suggesting not to. This thread is painful. There's no chance any of the people arguing against Zerg being UP play Zerg.
i play random(finished ~550 or something diamond). Z beeing my 2nd best race.
im not even argueing against the possibility(most Zs still expect to win with massing 1-2 units and aclicking into the enemy.) that Z might have issues. i just cant stand super biased nonsense posts.and when people complain about basic mechanic/style differences which are in the game for 12 years or say plain stupid/wrong stuff i can do nothing but facepalm irl.
Zerg is by far the manliest race, it just needs some more options.
The only thing is disagree with as blizzard goes is the creep tumor nerf, by the time you have enough creep to actually be able to move your hydras around, all the hard counters for hydras are out as well. Im sure a lot of zerg players are left with the thoght " what the F@#k am I suppose to do to stop that shit" at times.
On July 27 2010 05:10 MonkeyKungFu wrote: Zerg is by far the manliest race, it just needs some more options.
The only thing is disagree with as blizzard goes is the creep tumor nerf, by the time you have enough creep to actually be able to move your hydras around, all the hard counters for hydras are out as well. Im sure a lot of zerg players are left with the thoght " what the F@#k am I suppose to do to stop that shit" at times.
i just added one queen in my builds just for creep spreading. 150 mins to counter a "big nerf" doesnt sound bad to me. esp since its also a nice defense&AA unit which also can be used on the next expo.
On July 27 2010 04:25 Graven wrote: You cannot effectively scout a player with an Overlord that doesn't have the speed upgrade. I hate to make assumptions, but I'm guessing you don't play Zerg...
I didn't say AN overlord. You can scout pretty effectively with two, in my experience. They can't have anti air units all over their base, and if they do, you can just push their front and so on. But, if I'm wrong, let me know. I haven't played zerg in a while, what with the beta being down.
I'm not sure if you're trying to be difficult, but I'll remain cordial...
You can use two Overlord's...hell you can use three to be even safer. However, they need to be put in place several minutes before (crossing the map with an unupgraded Overlord takes time) and you need to hope the Overlord about to reveal the needed info isn't killed first. 2-3 Marines kill an Overlord VERY quickly, so to throw 200 minerals, several minutes of positioning, and two larvae away, all for a CHANCE at reveallnig what your opponent is doing isn't ideal.
Fair enough. Though, it's still not uncommon for the first hundred gas to go to lair, and if not the first, then the second hundred gas. It's one of the flaws in the game, sure. Just like protoss only has one means of detection. EDIT: And I'm not trying to be difficult. =]
dont listen to him. hes argueing that slow ovi scouts are worthless .yeah evryone that did that since 10 years (including evry pro and sc2) obviously has no clue.
evryone will tell you that sacing overlords is totally standart and recommended. if you dont already somewhat know whats going on from running 1-2 lings up his ramp or having a decently fast lair for a overseer intime.
dont let him talk you out of smart plays just because in his world Z is the worst race evurr !
had to jump in...
I do scout with slow Overlords and was not suggesting not to. This thread is painful. There's no chance any of the people arguing against Zerg being UP play Zerg.
What does that have to do with anything? Sure, I may not know all the details about the race, but I can comment on what I've seen professional players do. Whether or not that applies to casual gamers is another topic entirely.
It has a lot to do with everything. I agree that you can comment on what you see, but the feel of many things coems down to objective timings rather than first-person perspective. As an example, when you watch a replay and see an overlord scouting a base, it looks straight-forward, but there's a lot of planning that goes on into making that happen that you can't "feel" unless you play the race.
[/QUOTE]i just added one queen in my builds just for creep spreading. 150 mins to counter a "big nerf" doesnt sound bad to me. esp since its also a nice defense&AA unit which also can be used on the next expo.[/QUOTE]
Im well aware that you can make several queens, people did that long before the tumor time was doubled, but I still disagree =)
Was the creep too "powerfull" or were terran and protoss players in general too sloppy with getting their observers out to kill the creep tumors?
As in many other aspects they have been careful about nerfing things because it might not have been necessary, in this case, I think they should have waited and seen how it would evolve. To be honest, we have not seen many actively kill creep tumors in higher level of play either until recently
On July 27 2010 05:13 BeMannerDuPenner wrote: i just added one queen in my builds just for creep spreading. 150 mins to counter a "big nerf" doesnt sound bad to me. esp since its also a nice defense&AA unit which also can be used on the next expo.
Im well aware that you can make several queens, people did that long before the tumor time was doubled, but I still disagree =)
Was the creep too "powerfull" or were terran and protoss players in general too sloppy with getting their observers out to kill the creep tumors?
As in many other aspects they have been careful about nerfing things because it might not have been necessary, in this case, I think they should have waited and seen how it would evolve. To be honest, we have not seen many actively kill creep tumors in higher level of play either until recently
On July 27 2010 04:25 Graven wrote: You cannot effectively scout a player with an Overlord that doesn't have the speed upgrade. I hate to make assumptions, but I'm guessing you don't play Zerg...
I didn't say AN overlord. You can scout pretty effectively with two, in my experience. They can't have anti air units all over their base, and if they do, you can just push their front and so on. But, if I'm wrong, let me know. I haven't played zerg in a while, what with the beta being down.
I'm not sure if you're trying to be difficult, but I'll remain cordial...
You can use two Overlord's...hell you can use three to be even safer. However, they need to be put in place several minutes before (crossing the map with an unupgraded Overlord takes time) and you need to hope the Overlord about to reveal the needed info isn't killed first. 2-3 Marines kill an Overlord VERY quickly, so to throw 200 minerals, several minutes of positioning, and two larvae away, all for a CHANCE at reveallnig what your opponent is doing isn't ideal.
Fair enough. Though, it's still not uncommon for the first hundred gas to go to lair, and if not the first, then the second hundred gas. It's one of the flaws in the game, sure. Just like protoss only has one means of detection. EDIT: And I'm not trying to be difficult. =]
dont listen to him. hes argueing that slow ovi scouts are worthless .yeah evryone that did that since 10 years (including evry pro and sc2) obviously has no clue.
evryone will tell you that sacing overlords is totally standart and recommended. if you dont already somewhat know whats going on from running 1-2 lings up his ramp or having a decently fast lair for a overseer intime.
dont let him talk you out of smart plays just because in his world Z is the worst race evurr !
had to jump in...
I do scout with slow Overlords and was not suggesting not to. This thread is painful. There's no chance any of the people arguing against Zerg being UP play Zerg.
i play random(finished ~550 or something diamond). Z beeing my 2nd best race.
im not even argueing against the possibility(most Zs still expect to win with massing 1-2 units and aclicking into the enemy.) that Z might have issues. i just cant stand super biased nonsense posts.and when people complain about basic mechanic/style differences which are in the game for 12 years or say plain stupid/wrong stuff i can do nothing but facepalm irl.
I'd love to use more diverse unit compositions, but lack of options and gas restrictions prevent that. Roaches are used in a lot of compositions because they can act as a mineral dump. It's not realistic to go Hydra, Infestor, BroLord, Banaling.
Oppositely, Terran have a wide variety of unit-mixing that can be incorporated, making great unit compositions. To be honest, you can pick 3-4 random Terran units and in all liklihood, they'll synergize very well. There are many reasons for that, but two important ones are: Terran units are almost exclusively hard counters (every unit has a lot of bonus damage to specific armor types) and a lot of Terran units can target air (Zerg need to count on poorly-designed Corrupters, painfully-slow Hydra's, or ineffeictive-in-small-numbers Muta's for their AA).
On July 27 2010 05:13 BeMannerDuPenner wrote: i just added one queen in my builds just for creep spreading. 150 mins to counter a "big nerf" doesnt sound bad to me. esp since its also a nice defense&AA unit which also can be used on the next expo.
Im well aware that you can make several queens, people did that long before the tumor time was doubled, but I still disagree =)
Was the creep too "powerfull" or were terran and protoss players in general too sloppy with getting their observers out to kill the creep tumors?
As in many other aspects they have been careful about nerfing things because it might not have been necessary, in this case, I think they should have waited and seen how it would evolve. To be honest, we have not seen many actively kill creep tumors in higher level of play either until recently
well if you really did a good job at using 2 tumors you could easily creep your way over to the enemy on close positions like lt 6vs3 or steppes.
and i rather have something a bit "underpowered"(i dont think it is) which can be compensated by a extra queen or two then something a bit "overpowered" ( i dont say it was) which has to be compensated by ravens/obs.
Oppositely, Terran have a wide variety of unit-mixing that can be incorporated, making great unit compositions. To be honest, you can pick 3-4 random Terran units and in all liklihood, they'll synergize very well. There are many reasons for that, but two important ones are: Terran units are almost exclusively hard counters (every unit has a lot of bonus damage to specific armor types) and a lot of Terran units can target air (Zerg need to count on poorly-designed Corrupters, painfully-slow Hydra's, or ineffeictive-in-small-numbers Muta's for their AA).
see thats the problem. you see evrything only from a Z point of view. "oh T has so many hardcounters!". yeah thats true. but that coin has 2 sides. you get countered just as easy as you counter. if your composition isnt spot on youll lose evrything else. while the Z army has lots of versatile units that are plain good in many aspects. like the hydra,roach or muta. T units often are good vs only one thing. while a hydra is good vs evrything but 1-2 things.
the problem most Zs have is that they try to beat a 200/200 upgraded well mixed army with roach/hydra or muta/x only. that doesnt work. once they realise that a) the specialised nature of the T army works both ways and b) Hive tech is super strong.
On July 27 2010 04:25 Graven wrote: You cannot effectively scout a player with an Overlord that doesn't have the speed upgrade. I hate to make assumptions, but I'm guessing you don't play Zerg...
I didn't say AN overlord. You can scout pretty effectively with two, in my experience. They can't have anti air units all over their base, and if they do, you can just push their front and so on. But, if I'm wrong, let me know. I haven't played zerg in a while, what with the beta being down.
I'm not sure if you're trying to be difficult, but I'll remain cordial...
You can use two Overlord's...hell you can use three to be even safer. However, they need to be put in place several minutes before (crossing the map with an unupgraded Overlord takes time) and you need to hope the Overlord about to reveal the needed info isn't killed first. 2-3 Marines kill an Overlord VERY quickly, so to throw 200 minerals, several minutes of positioning, and two larvae away, all for a CHANCE at reveallnig what your opponent is doing isn't ideal.
Fair enough. Though, it's still not uncommon for the first hundred gas to go to lair, and if not the first, then the second hundred gas. It's one of the flaws in the game, sure. Just like protoss only has one means of detection. EDIT: And I'm not trying to be difficult. =]
dont listen to him. hes argueing that slow ovi scouts are worthless .yeah evryone that did that since 10 years (including evry pro and sc2) obviously has no clue.
evryone will tell you that sacing overlords is totally standart and recommended. if you dont already somewhat know whats going on from running 1-2 lings up his ramp or having a decently fast lair for a overseer intime.
dont let him talk you out of smart plays just because in his world Z is the worst race evurr !
had to jump in...
I do scout with slow Overlords and was not suggesting not to. This thread is painful. There's no chance any of the people arguing against Zerg being UP play Zerg.
i play random(finished ~550 or something diamond). Z beeing my 2nd best race.
im not even argueing against the possibility(most Zs still expect to win with massing 1-2 units and aclicking into the enemy.) that Z might have issues. i just cant stand super biased nonsense posts.and when people complain about basic mechanic/style differences which are in the game for 12 years or say plain stupid/wrong stuff i can do nothing but facepalm irl.
I'd love to use more diverse unit compositions, but lack of options and gas restrictions prevent that. Roaches are used in a lot of compositions because they can act as a mineral dump. It's not realistic to go Hydra, Infestor, BroLord, Banaling.
Oppositely, Terran have a wide variety of unit-mixing that can be incorporated, making great unit compositions. To be honest, you can pick 3-4 random Terran units and in all liklihood, they'll synergize very well. There are many reasons for that, but two important ones are: Terran units are almost exclusively hard counters (every unit has a lot of bonus damage to specific armor types) and a lot of Terran units can target air (Zerg need to count on poorly-designed Corrupters, painfully-slow Hydra's, or ineffeictive-in-small-numbers Muta's for their AA).
Terran units that can hit air: Marie, ghost, Thor. Zerg Units that can hit air: Hydralisk, queen. That means Terrran only has one more than Zerg. If you include Air units,then that becomes five four, counting the terrible Battle Cruiser which is still only one more.
On July 27 2010 04:25 Graven wrote: You cannot effectively scout a player with an Overlord that doesn't have the speed upgrade. I hate to make assumptions, but I'm guessing you don't play Zerg...
I didn't say AN overlord. You can scout pretty effectively with two, in my experience. They can't have anti air units all over their base, and if they do, you can just push their front and so on. But, if I'm wrong, let me know. I haven't played zerg in a while, what with the beta being down.
I'm not sure if you're trying to be difficult, but I'll remain cordial...
You can use two Overlord's...hell you can use three to be even safer. However, they need to be put in place several minutes before (crossing the map with an unupgraded Overlord takes time) and you need to hope the Overlord about to reveal the needed info isn't killed first. 2-3 Marines kill an Overlord VERY quickly, so to throw 200 minerals, several minutes of positioning, and two larvae away, all for a CHANCE at reveallnig what your opponent is doing isn't ideal.
Fair enough. Though, it's still not uncommon for the first hundred gas to go to lair, and if not the first, then the second hundred gas. It's one of the flaws in the game, sure. Just like protoss only has one means of detection. EDIT: And I'm not trying to be difficult. =]
dont listen to him. hes argueing that slow ovi scouts are worthless .yeah evryone that did that since 10 years (including evry pro and sc2) obviously has no clue.
evryone will tell you that sacing overlords is totally standart and recommended. if you dont already somewhat know whats going on from running 1-2 lings up his ramp or having a decently fast lair for a overseer intime.
dont let him talk you out of smart plays just because in his world Z is the worst race evurr !
had to jump in...
I do scout with slow Overlords and was not suggesting not to. This thread is painful. There's no chance any of the people arguing against Zerg being UP play Zerg.
i play random(finished ~550 or something diamond). Z beeing my 2nd best race.
im not even argueing against the possibility(most Zs still expect to win with massing 1-2 units and aclicking into the enemy.) that Z might have issues. i just cant stand super biased nonsense posts.and when people complain about basic mechanic/style differences which are in the game for 12 years or say plain stupid/wrong stuff i can do nothing but facepalm irl.
I'd love to use more diverse unit compositions, but lack of options and gas restrictions prevent that. Roaches are used in a lot of compositions because they can act as a mineral dump. It's not realistic to go Hydra, Infestor, BroLord, Banaling.
Oppositely, Terran have a wide variety of unit-mixing that can be incorporated, making great unit compositions. To be honest, you can pick 3-4 random Terran units and in all liklihood, they'll synergize very well. There are many reasons for that, but two important ones are: Terran units are almost exclusively hard counters (every unit has a lot of bonus damage to specific armor types) and a lot of Terran units can target air (Zerg need to count on poorly-designed Corrupters, painfully-slow Hydra's, or ineffeictive-in-small-numbers Muta's for their AA).
Terran units that can hit air: Marie, ghost, Thor. Zerg Units that can hit air: Hydralisk, queen. That means Terrran only has one more than Zerg. If you include Air units,then that becomes five four, counting the terrible Battle Cruiser which is still only one more.
On July 27 2010 04:25 Graven wrote: You cannot effectively scout a player with an Overlord that doesn't have the speed upgrade. I hate to make assumptions, but I'm guessing you don't play Zerg...
I didn't say AN overlord. You can scout pretty effectively with two, in my experience. They can't have anti air units all over their base, and if they do, you can just push their front and so on. But, if I'm wrong, let me know. I haven't played zerg in a while, what with the beta being down.
I'm not sure if you're trying to be difficult, but I'll remain cordial...
You can use two Overlord's...hell you can use three to be even safer. However, they need to be put in place several minutes before (crossing the map with an unupgraded Overlord takes time) and you need to hope the Overlord about to reveal the needed info isn't killed first. 2-3 Marines kill an Overlord VERY quickly, so to throw 200 minerals, several minutes of positioning, and two larvae away, all for a CHANCE at reveallnig what your opponent is doing isn't ideal.
Fair enough. Though, it's still not uncommon for the first hundred gas to go to lair, and if not the first, then the second hundred gas. It's one of the flaws in the game, sure. Just like protoss only has one means of detection. EDIT: And I'm not trying to be difficult. =]
dont listen to him. hes argueing that slow ovi scouts are worthless .yeah evryone that did that since 10 years (including evry pro and sc2) obviously has no clue.
evryone will tell you that sacing overlords is totally standart and recommended. if you dont already somewhat know whats going on from running 1-2 lings up his ramp or having a decently fast lair for a overseer intime.
dont let him talk you out of smart plays just because in his world Z is the worst race evurr !
had to jump in...
I do scout with slow Overlords and was not suggesting not to. This thread is painful. There's no chance any of the people arguing against Zerg being UP play Zerg.
i play random(finished ~550 or something diamond). Z beeing my 2nd best race.
im not even argueing against the possibility(most Zs still expect to win with massing 1-2 units and aclicking into the enemy.) that Z might have issues. i just cant stand super biased nonsense posts.and when people complain about basic mechanic/style differences which are in the game for 12 years or say plain stupid/wrong stuff i can do nothing but facepalm irl.
I'd love to use more diverse unit compositions, but lack of options and gas restrictions prevent that. Roaches are used in a lot of compositions because they can act as a mineral dump. It's not realistic to go Hydra, Infestor, BroLord, Banaling.
Oppositely, Terran have a wide variety of unit-mixing that can be incorporated, making great unit compositions. To be honest, you can pick 3-4 random Terran units and in all liklihood, they'll synergize very well. There are many reasons for that, but two important ones are: Terran units are almost exclusively hard counters (every unit has a lot of bonus damage to specific armor types) and a lot of Terran units can target air (Zerg need to count on poorly-designed Corrupters, painfully-slow Hydra's, or ineffeictive-in-small-numbers Muta's for their AA).
Terran units that can hit air: Marie, ghost, Thor. Zerg Units that can hit air: Hydralisk, queen. That means Terrran only has one more than Zerg. If you include Air units,then that becomes five four, counting the terrible Battle Cruiser which is still only one more.
Not that I should even have to explain why your post is silly, but Queens cannot be used offesively (realistically), leaving only Hydra's, which is why you see so many boring Roach/Hydra compositions. Terran, oppositely, can do compositions like Marine/Tank/Hellion or Maurader/Thor. both of which need to be countered entirely differently. It's painfully simple why Terran appear more diverse in games...it's because they are more diverse.
And there's nothing wrong with them being diverse...it's as if terran players want to argue against simple facts in the hopes that no one else will see through their paper-thin, unfounded arguments.
On July 27 2010 04:25 Graven wrote: You cannot effectively scout a player with an Overlord that doesn't have the speed upgrade. I hate to make assumptions, but I'm guessing you don't play Zerg...
I didn't say AN overlord. You can scout pretty effectively with two, in my experience. They can't have anti air units all over their base, and if they do, you can just push their front and so on. But, if I'm wrong, let me know. I haven't played zerg in a while, what with the beta being down.
I'm not sure if you're trying to be difficult, but I'll remain cordial...
You can use two Overlord's...hell you can use three to be even safer. However, they need to be put in place several minutes before (crossing the map with an unupgraded Overlord takes time) and you need to hope the Overlord about to reveal the needed info isn't killed first. 2-3 Marines kill an Overlord VERY quickly, so to throw 200 minerals, several minutes of positioning, and two larvae away, all for a CHANCE at reveallnig what your opponent is doing isn't ideal.
Fair enough. Though, it's still not uncommon for the first hundred gas to go to lair, and if not the first, then the second hundred gas. It's one of the flaws in the game, sure. Just like protoss only has one means of detection. EDIT: And I'm not trying to be difficult. =]
dont listen to him. hes argueing that slow ovi scouts are worthless .yeah evryone that did that since 10 years (including evry pro and sc2) obviously has no clue.
evryone will tell you that sacing overlords is totally standart and recommended. if you dont already somewhat know whats going on from running 1-2 lings up his ramp or having a decently fast lair for a overseer intime.
dont let him talk you out of smart plays just because in his world Z is the worst race evurr !
had to jump in...
I do scout with slow Overlords and was not suggesting not to. This thread is painful. There's no chance any of the people arguing against Zerg being UP play Zerg.
i play random(finished ~550 or something diamond). Z beeing my 2nd best race.
im not even argueing against the possibility(most Zs still expect to win with massing 1-2 units and aclicking into the enemy.) that Z might have issues. i just cant stand super biased nonsense posts.and when people complain about basic mechanic/style differences which are in the game for 12 years or say plain stupid/wrong stuff i can do nothing but facepalm irl.
I'd love to use more diverse unit compositions, but lack of options and gas restrictions prevent that. Roaches are used in a lot of compositions because they can act as a mineral dump. It's not realistic to go Hydra, Infestor, BroLord, Banaling.
Oppositely, Terran have a wide variety of unit-mixing that can be incorporated, making great unit compositions. To be honest, you can pick 3-4 random Terran units and in all liklihood, they'll synergize very well. There are many reasons for that, but two important ones are: Terran units are almost exclusively hard counters (every unit has a lot of bonus damage to specific armor types) and a lot of Terran units can target air (Zerg need to count on poorly-designed Corrupters, painfully-slow Hydra's, or ineffeictive-in-small-numbers Muta's for their AA).
Terran units that can hit air: Marie, ghost, Thor. Zerg Units that can hit air: Hydralisk, queen. That means Terrran only has one more than Zerg. If you include Air units,then that becomes five four, counting the terrible Battle Cruiser which is still only one more.
Not that I should even have to explain why your post is silly, but Queens cannot be used offesively (realistically), leaving only Hydra's, which is why you see so many boring Roach/Hydra compositions. Terran, oppositely, can do compositions like Marine/Tank/Hellion or Maurader/Thor. both of which need to be countered entirely differently. It's painfully simple why Terran appear more diverse in games...it's because they are more diverse.
And there's nothing wrong with them being diverse...it's as if terran players want to argue against simple facts in the hopes that no one else will see through their paper-thin, unfounded arguments.
Why can't queens? Sure, early game you don't have the production capacity, but late game? Why not? Regardless, Terran is more diverse. . .because it has more units. That's literally it. Zerg will diversify with the expansion, I guarantee it.
Ahout mech: although i do think it is hard to beat i know we can argue about map balance being the problem, but at the end of the day you are just agreeing that zvt is broken you just are blaming it on something else.
Mech aside, i think the matchup feels so hard for z because of the sheer amount of nearly unscoutable strategues all of which require a unique response to avoid falling way behind not to mention the amount of vulnerability zerg must submit to in order to take an advantage. Note i say unscoutable because of the wall off. I know it is possible to sac overlord but its not a sure thing and can often get you the info you need later than you would like.
I will list all the strats i am thinking about when i have to play zerg. Early reaper. Reaper bunker rush Marine bunker rush Early hellions into expand Early hellions into more hellions Thor drop Hell8on maurader timing push Marine hellion iming push Banshees Banshees with cloak Thor.timing push Tank play
If i make the wrong choice on what your hiding behind the wall off. i literally have no chance. You pick the harrass and if i play too safe i have no way to punish you with my defensive slow units that die to one tank on the ridge. I dont play safe enough and four hellions kills 10 or more drones.
If terran expects mutas and gets a thor. And the flthree to four turrets it takes to cover two bases (lol). The thor can be dropped or used to great effect against ground.
If zerg goes muta and terran has five rines and a thor your out 1000-1400 resources for nothing because they die like paper to terran anti air.
On July 27 2010 04:27 MythicalMage wrote: [quote] I didn't say AN overlord. You can scout pretty effectively with two, in my experience. They can't have anti air units all over their base, and if they do, you can just push their front and so on. But, if I'm wrong, let me know. I haven't played zerg in a while, what with the beta being down.
I'm not sure if you're trying to be difficult, but I'll remain cordial...
You can use two Overlord's...hell you can use three to be even safer. However, they need to be put in place several minutes before (crossing the map with an unupgraded Overlord takes time) and you need to hope the Overlord about to reveal the needed info isn't killed first. 2-3 Marines kill an Overlord VERY quickly, so to throw 200 minerals, several minutes of positioning, and two larvae away, all for a CHANCE at reveallnig what your opponent is doing isn't ideal.
Fair enough. Though, it's still not uncommon for the first hundred gas to go to lair, and if not the first, then the second hundred gas. It's one of the flaws in the game, sure. Just like protoss only has one means of detection. EDIT: And I'm not trying to be difficult. =]
dont listen to him. hes argueing that slow ovi scouts are worthless .yeah evryone that did that since 10 years (including evry pro and sc2) obviously has no clue.
evryone will tell you that sacing overlords is totally standart and recommended. if you dont already somewhat know whats going on from running 1-2 lings up his ramp or having a decently fast lair for a overseer intime.
dont let him talk you out of smart plays just because in his world Z is the worst race evurr !
had to jump in...
I do scout with slow Overlords and was not suggesting not to. This thread is painful. There's no chance any of the people arguing against Zerg being UP play Zerg.
i play random(finished ~550 or something diamond). Z beeing my 2nd best race.
im not even argueing against the possibility(most Zs still expect to win with massing 1-2 units and aclicking into the enemy.) that Z might have issues. i just cant stand super biased nonsense posts.and when people complain about basic mechanic/style differences which are in the game for 12 years or say plain stupid/wrong stuff i can do nothing but facepalm irl.
I'd love to use more diverse unit compositions, but lack of options and gas restrictions prevent that. Roaches are used in a lot of compositions because they can act as a mineral dump. It's not realistic to go Hydra, Infestor, BroLord, Banaling.
Oppositely, Terran have a wide variety of unit-mixing that can be incorporated, making great unit compositions. To be honest, you can pick 3-4 random Terran units and in all liklihood, they'll synergize very well. There are many reasons for that, but two important ones are: Terran units are almost exclusively hard counters (every unit has a lot of bonus damage to specific armor types) and a lot of Terran units can target air (Zerg need to count on poorly-designed Corrupters, painfully-slow Hydra's, or ineffeictive-in-small-numbers Muta's for their AA).
Terran units that can hit air: Marie, ghost, Thor. Zerg Units that can hit air: Hydralisk, queen. That means Terrran only has one more than Zerg. If you include Air units,then that becomes five four, counting the terrible Battle Cruiser which is still only one more.
Not that I should even have to explain why your post is silly, but Queens cannot be used offesively (realistically), leaving only Hydra's, which is why you see so many boring Roach/Hydra compositions. Terran, oppositely, can do compositions like Marine/Tank/Hellion or Maurader/Thor. both of which need to be countered entirely differently. It's painfully simple why Terran appear more diverse in games...it's because they are more diverse.
And there's nothing wrong with them being diverse...it's as if terran players want to argue against simple facts in the hopes that no one else will see through their paper-thin, unfounded arguments.
Why can't queens? Sure, early game you don't have the production capacity, but late game? Why not? Regardless, Terran is more diverse. . .because it has more units. That's literally it. Zerg will diversify with the expansion, I guarantee it.
I just think it's funny you're writing off zerg balance in a game that's just been released and are just saying deal with it, wait till next year to become as competitive as terran/toss.
Blizzard can easily balance the game with a patch or two. Why should anyone have to wait for an entirely new game to achieve balance?
On July 27 2010 05:40 Ruthless wrote: Ahout mech: although i do think it is hard to beat i know we can argue about map balance being the problem, but at the end of the day you are just agreeing that zvt is broken you just are blaming it on something else.
Mech aside, i think the matchup feels so hard for z because of the sheer amount of nearly unscoutable strategues all of which require a unique response to avoid falling way behind not to mention the amount of vulnerability zerg must submit to in order to take an advantage.
I will list all the strats i am thinking about when i have to play zerg. Early reaper. Reaper bunker rush Marine bunker rush Early hellions into expand Early hellions into more hellions Thor drop Hell8on maurader timing push Marine hellion iming push Banshees Banshees with cloak Thor.timing push Tank play
If i make the wrong choice on what your hiding behind the wall off. i literally have no chance. You pick the harrass and if i play too safe i have no way to punish you with my defensive slow units that die to one tank on the ridge. I dont play safe enough and four hellions kills 10 or more drones.
If terran expects mutas and gets a thor. And the flthree to four turrets it takes to cover two bases (lol). The thor can be dropped or used to great effect against ground.
If zerg goes muta and terran has five rines and a thor your out 1000-1400 resources for nothing because they die like paper to terran anti air.
I think I'm going to quote myself, much earlier in this thread in regards to this.
On July 27 2010 03:50 MythicalMage wrote: And, more importantly, and I know people aren't going to want to hear this, but Zerg is the least finished race. Wait for the zerg expansion, and then see what options you have.
On July 27 2010 05:37 MythicalMage wrote: Why can't queens? Sure, early game you don't have the production capacity, but late game? Why not?
Did you just suggest going mass Queens in the late game? You're kinda retarded.
Why not? You have the hatcheries that can make them and whatnot. I'm not saying it's ideal, or anything, but there's no reason to completely rule one of the few zerg units out of the game.
[/QUOTE]Why can't queens? Sure, early game you don't have the production capacity, but late game? Why not? Regardless, Terran is more diverse. . .because it has more units. That's literally it. Zerg will diversify with the expansion, I guarantee it. [/QUOTE]
Queens are practically immobile off creep, and by the time you are able to cover most maps w/ creep your opponent should have observers or a raven out to snipe all of your forward creep tumors.
On July 27 2010 05:43 DoomFox wrote: I just think it's funny you're writing off zerg balance in a game that's just been released and are just saying deal with it, wait till next year to become as competitive as terran/toss.
Blizzard can easily balance the game with a patch or two. Why should anyone have to wait for an entirely new game to achieve balance?
I'm not saying that. I think the game is balanced, and I think that if you want more diversity, you can wait for the expansion.
On July 27 2010 05:43 DoomFox wrote: I just think it's funny you're writing off zerg balance in a game that's just been released and are just saying deal with it, wait till next year to become as competitive as terran/toss.
Blizzard can easily balance the game with a patch or two. Why should anyone have to wait for an entirely new game to achieve balance?
That's exactly it. I feel that the opposing logic is so ridiculous, it may actually just be trolling. I can't fathom a rational person having that opinion.
Because the supply wasted to make Queens would be put to better use making actual useful units. Queens are not an offensive unit. How about you learn a little bit about the race before you enter a discussion like this.
On July 27 2010 05:37 MythicalMage wrote: Why can't queens? Sure, early game you don't have the production capacity, but late game? Why not?
Did you just suggest going mass Queens in the late game? You're kinda retarded.
Why not? You have the hatcheries that can make them and whatnot. I'm not saying it's ideal, or anything, but there's no reason to completely rule one of the few zerg units out of the game.
Why not? Do you remember why Queens speed of creep was nerfed? Blizzard specifically stated the queen is not intended for offense. Besides if we're talking late game, queen's damage is crap compared to the units it's going to be fighting against.
Have you actually played zerg at a competent level or are you just brainstorming ideas without any experience for basis?
I can't tell if you're being serious or just trolling for your own amusement.
On July 27 2010 05:48 Headshot wrote: Because the supply wasted to make Queens would be put to better use making actual useful units. Queens are not an offensive unit. How about you learn a little bit about the race before you enter a discussion like this.
Why aren't they? Sure the mobility thing, but their anti air damage isn't bad, nor is their anti ground. I'm not saying they're your entire army, I'm saying they can be part of your composition. And I'm not even talking about transfusion.
Ahout mech: although i do think it is hard to beat i know we can argue about map balance being the problem, but at the end of the day you are just agreeing that zvt is broken you just are blaming it on something else.
Mech aside, i think the matchup feels so hard for z because of the sheer amount of nearly unscoutable strategues all of which require a unique response to avoid falling way behind not to mention the amount of vulnerability zerg must submit to in order to take an advantage.
I will list all the strats i am thinking about when i have to play zerg. Early reaper. Reaper bunker rush Marine bunker rush Early hellions into expand Early hellions into more hellions Thor drop Hell8on maurader timing push Marine hellion iming push Banshees Banshees with cloak Thor.timing push Tank play
If i make the wrong choice on what your hiding behind the wall off. i literally have no chance. You pick the harrass and if i play too safe i have no way to punish you with my defensive slow units that die to one tank on the ridge. I dont play safe enough and four hellions kills 10 or more drones.
If terran expects mutas and gets a thor. And the flthree to four turrets it takes to cover two bases (lol). The thor can be dropped or used to great effect against ground.
If zerg goes muta and terran has five rines and a thor your out 1000-1400 resources for nothing because they die like paper to terran anti air.
most of that can easily be countered (pull drones kill scv building bunker,block ramp etc) scouted (run a ling up the ramp to see what hes doing/sac ovi) or isnt a big issue if you arent overdroning and tech normally/have some units . in short solid well timed play solves the majority of your problems.
ofc there are openings that are strong and can easily surprise you if well timed. thats always the case in evry matchup. but its not nearly as bad as you make it sound.
and you are vastly exaggerating on the muta part. still most of my wins vs T come from muta contains. losses as T are split between muta harrass and just macro games where my opening fails to do dmg and i get behind.
ofc there are openings that are strong and can easily surprise you if well timed. thats always the case in evry matchup. but its not nearly as bad as you make it sound.
I'm going to take my own advice and stop replying to MythicalMage. He's already admitted to not knowing anything about zerg mechanics or playstyle and is either trolling on purpose or is basing his theories on thin air.
On July 27 2010 05:37 MythicalMage wrote: Why can't queens? Sure, early game you don't have the production capacity, but late game? Why not?
Did you just suggest going mass Queens in the late game? You're kinda retarded.
Why not? You have the hatcheries that can make them and whatnot. I'm not saying it's ideal, or anything, but there's no reason to completely rule one of the few zerg units out of the game.
Why not? Do you remember why Queens speed of creep was nerfed? Blizzard specifically stated the queen is not intended for offense. Besides if we're talking late game, queen's damage is crap compared to the units it's going to be fighting against.
Have you actually played zerg at a competent level or are you just brainstorming ideas without any experience for basis?
I can't tell if you're being serious or just trolling for your own amusement.
I'm being serious, I assure you. People shouldn't dismiss something so quickly, they should at least give it a try. Blizzard nerfed Queen speed off creep, because there was an abusable strategy involving them, or so I thought. That doesn't mean that they're not offensive. I am brainstorming though. Just throwing ideas out there. People complaining they don't have enough units and then dismissing a unit without any real thought is less than ideal.
On July 27 2010 05:51 DoomFox wrote: I'm going to take my own advice and stop replying to MythicalMage. He's already admitted to not knowing anything about zerg mechanics or playstyle and is either trolling on purpose or is basing his theories on thin air.
This is ridiculous. Someone save this thread.
I love how you make up things that I say. It's really quite humorous.
On July 27 2010 05:37 MythicalMage wrote: Why can't queens? Sure, early game you don't have the production capacity, but late game? Why not?
Did you just suggest going mass Queens in the late game? You're kinda retarded.
Why not? You have the hatcheries that can make them and whatnot. I'm not saying it's ideal, or anything, but there's no reason to completely rule one of the few zerg units out of the game.
On July 27 2010 05:48 Headshot wrote: Because the supply wasted to make Queens would be put to better use making actual useful units. Queens are not an offensive unit. How about you learn a little bit about the race before you enter a discussion like this.
Why aren't they? Sure the mobility thing, but their anti air damage isn't bad, nor is their anti ground. I'm not saying they're your entire army, I'm saying they can be part of your composition. And I'm not even talking about transfusion.
On July 27 2010 05:37 MythicalMage wrote: Why can't queens? Sure, early game you don't have the production capacity, but late game? Why not?
Did you just suggest going mass Queens in the late game? You're kinda retarded.
Why not? You have the hatcheries that can make them and whatnot. I'm not saying it's ideal, or anything, but there's no reason to completely rule one of the few zerg units out of the game.
LOL. You're an awesome troll. Well done.
I am literally not trolling. I'm just putting out the possibility.
Why can't you people think outside of the box? You bitch and bitch and bitch about "Oh we have so few anti air units" and when someone puts an anti air unit in front of you, you bitch about that too.
On July 27 2010 05:40 Ruthless wrote: Ahout mech: although i do think it is hard to beat i know we can argue about map balance being the problem, but at the end of the day you are just agreeing that zvt is broken you just are blaming it on something else.
Mech aside, i think the matchup feels so hard for z because of the sheer amount of nearly unscoutable strategues all of which require a unique response to avoid falling way behind not to mention the amount of vulnerability zerg must submit to in order to take an advantage.
I will list all the strats i am thinking about when i have to play zerg. Early reaper. Reaper bunker rush Marine bunker rush Early hellions into expand Early hellions into more hellions Thor drop Hell8on maurader timing push Marine hellion iming push Banshees Banshees with cloak Thor.timing push Tank play
If i make the wrong choice on what your hiding behind the wall off. i literally have no chance. You pick the harrass and if i play too safe i have no way to punish you with my defensive slow units that die to one tank on the ridge. I dont play safe enough and four hellions kills 10 or more drones.
If terran expects mutas and gets a thor. And the flthree to four turrets it takes to cover two bases (lol). The thor can be dropped or used to great effect against ground.
If zerg goes muta and terran has five rines and a thor your out 1000-1400 resources for nothing because they die like paper to terran anti air.
I think I'm going to quote myself, much earlier in this thread in regards to this.
On July 27 2010 03:50 MythicalMage wrote: And, more importantly, and I know people aren't going to want to hear this, but Zerg is the least finished race. Wait for the zerg expansion, and then see what options you have.
Thats an explanation for why you agree with me tha zerg vs terran is an unfair matchuo? You are just shifting the debate and everyone is falling into it. I dont really care about your speculations about zergs degree of completion or your speculations on their future development. I am more interested in discussing the idea of zerg vs terran and the difficulties i have been facing more and more as the entire terran player base is discovering more ways to exploit zergs
I swear to god I'm not trolling. But if you think I am, then the mods will likely agree with you. I'll just leave it here. What with zerg only having one unit that can shoot up and all.
Zerg may be the so called king of tech switching, but their units have to be massed, as their units are balanced around being able to make a lot of them from all larvae. Its not like each hatchery is making a siege tank, or a thor, or stalkers or immortals. They make fast low hp zerg units, that you need a lot of, and in the right position, to do good damage. So tech switching isn't really a plus, at least not a huge plus.
On July 27 2010 05:40 Ruthless wrote: Ahout mech: although i do think it is hard to beat i know we can argue about map balance being the problem, but at the end of the day you are just agreeing that zvt is broken you just are blaming it on something else.
Mech aside, i think the matchup feels so hard for z because of the sheer amount of nearly unscoutable strategues all of which require a unique response to avoid falling way behind not to mention the amount of vulnerability zerg must submit to in order to take an advantage.
I will list all the strats i am thinking about when i have to play zerg. Early reaper. Reaper bunker rush Marine bunker rush Early hellions into expand Early hellions into more hellions Thor drop Hell8on maurader timing push Marine hellion iming push Banshees Banshees with cloak Thor.timing push Tank play
If i make the wrong choice on what your hiding behind the wall off. i literally have no chance. You pick the harrass and if i play too safe i have no way to punish you with my defensive slow units that die to one tank on the ridge. I dont play safe enough and four hellions kills 10 or more drones.
If terran expects mutas and gets a thor. And the flthree to four turrets it takes to cover two bases (lol). The thor can be dropped or used to great effect against ground.
If zerg goes muta and terran has five rines and a thor your out 1000-1400 resources for nothing because they die like paper to terran anti air.
I think I'm going to quote myself, much earlier in this thread in regards to this.
On July 27 2010 03:50 MythicalMage wrote: And, more importantly, and I know people aren't going to want to hear this, but Zerg is the least finished race. Wait for the zerg expansion, and then see what options you have.
Thats an explanation for why you agree with me tha zerg vs terran is an unfair matchuo? You are just shifting the debate and everyone is falling into it. I dont really care about your speculations about zergs degree of completion or your speculations on their future development. I am more interested in discussing the idea of zerg vs terran and the difficulties i have been facing more and more as the entire terran player base is discovering more ways to exploit zergs
Then what I said is irrelevant to what you want to talk about. I, as someone who has played so little zerg, obviously know nothing of the race and can be of no help to you.
On July 27 2010 05:40 Ruthless wrote: Ahout mech: although i do think it is hard to beat i know we can argue about map balance being the problem, but at the end of the day you are just agreeing that zvt is broken you just are blaming it on something else.
Mech aside, i think the matchup feels so hard for z because of the sheer amount of nearly unscoutable strategues all of which require a unique response to avoid falling way behind not to mention the amount of vulnerability zerg must submit to in order to take an advantage.
I will list all the strats i am thinking about when i have to play zerg. Early reaper. Reaper bunker rush Marine bunker rush Early hellions into expand Early hellions into more hellions Thor drop Hell8on maurader timing push Marine hellion iming push Banshees Banshees with cloak Thor.timing push Tank play
If i make the wrong choice on what your hiding behind the wall off. i literally have no chance. You pick the harrass and if i play too safe i have no way to punish you with my defensive slow units that die to one tank on the ridge. I dont play safe enough and four hellions kills 10 or more drones.
If terran expects mutas and gets a thor. And the flthree to four turrets it takes to cover two bases (lol). The thor can be dropped or used to great effect against ground.
If zerg goes muta and terran has five rines and a thor your out 1000-1400 resources for nothing because they die like paper to terran anti air.
I think I'm going to quote myself, much earlier in this thread in regards to this.
On July 27 2010 03:50 MythicalMage wrote: And, more importantly, and I know people aren't going to want to hear this, but Zerg is the least finished race. Wait for the zerg expansion, and then see what options you have.
Thats an explanation for why you agree with me tha zerg vs terran is an unfair matchuo? You are just shifting the debate and everyone is falling into it. I dont really care about your speculations about zergs degree of completion or your speculations on their future development. I am more interested in discussing the idea of zerg vs terran and the difficulties i have been facing more and more as the entire terran player base is discovering more ways to exploit zergs
Then what I said is irrelevant to what you want to talk about. I, as someone who has played so little zerg, obviously know nothing of the race and can be of no help to you.
Then why are you in this thread? Oh yea, you're trolling.
Then i would appreciate if you dont fill this thread with garbage thanks.
I know my post is like two pages deep in flame now but i would really like to hear terran and zerg players thoughts on what i have said. If they find it relatable etc
On July 27 2010 05:40 Ruthless wrote: Ahout mech: although i do think it is hard to beat i know we can argue about map balance being the problem, but at the end of the day you are just agreeing that zvt is broken you just are blaming it on something else.
Mech aside, i think the matchup feels so hard for z because of the sheer amount of nearly unscoutable strategues all of which require a unique response to avoid falling way behind not to mention the amount of vulnerability zerg must submit to in order to take an advantage.
I will list all the strats i am thinking about when i have to play zerg. Early reaper. Reaper bunker rush Marine bunker rush Early hellions into expand Early hellions into more hellions Thor drop Hell8on maurader timing push Marine hellion iming push Banshees Banshees with cloak Thor.timing push Tank play
If i make the wrong choice on what your hiding behind the wall off. i literally have no chance. You pick the harrass and if i play too safe i have no way to punish you with my defensive slow units that die to one tank on the ridge. I dont play safe enough and four hellions kills 10 or more drones.
If terran expects mutas and gets a thor. And the flthree to four turrets it takes to cover two bases (lol). The thor can be dropped or used to great effect against ground.
If zerg goes muta and terran has five rines and a thor your out 1000-1400 resources for nothing because they die like paper to terran anti air.
I think I'm going to quote myself, much earlier in this thread in regards to this.
On July 27 2010 03:50 MythicalMage wrote: And, more importantly, and I know people aren't going to want to hear this, but Zerg is the least finished race. Wait for the zerg expansion, and then see what options you have.
Thats an explanation for why you agree with me tha zerg vs terran is an unfair matchuo? You are just shifting the debate and everyone is falling into it. I dont really care about your speculations about zergs degree of completion or your speculations on their future development. I am more interested in discussing the idea of zerg vs terran and the difficulties i have been facing more and more as the entire terran player base is discovering more ways to exploit zergs
Then what I said is irrelevant to what you want to talk about. I, as someone who has played so little zerg, obviously know nothing of the race and can be of no help to you.
Self-admitted lack of knowledge of Zerg + Strongly opinionated Zerg-based statements = ?
On July 27 2010 05:40 Ruthless wrote: Ahout mech: although i do think it is hard to beat i know we can argue about map balance being the problem, but at the end of the day you are just agreeing that zvt is broken you just are blaming it on something else.
Mech aside, i think the matchup feels so hard for z because of the sheer amount of nearly unscoutable strategues all of which require a unique response to avoid falling way behind not to mention the amount of vulnerability zerg must submit to in order to take an advantage.
I will list all the strats i am thinking about when i have to play zerg. Early reaper. Reaper bunker rush Marine bunker rush Early hellions into expand Early hellions into more hellions Thor drop Hell8on maurader timing push Marine hellion iming push Banshees Banshees with cloak Thor.timing push Tank play
If i make the wrong choice on what your hiding behind the wall off. i literally have no chance. You pick the harrass and if i play too safe i have no way to punish you with my defensive slow units that die to one tank on the ridge. I dont play safe enough and four hellions kills 10 or more drones.
If terran expects mutas and gets a thor. And the flthree to four turrets it takes to cover two bases (lol). The thor can be dropped or used to great effect against ground.
If zerg goes muta and terran has five rines and a thor your out 1000-1400 resources for nothing because they die like paper to terran anti air.
I think I'm going to quote myself, much earlier in this thread in regards to this.
On July 27 2010 03:50 MythicalMage wrote: And, more importantly, and I know people aren't going to want to hear this, but Zerg is the least finished race. Wait for the zerg expansion, and then see what options you have.
Thats an explanation for why you agree with me tha zerg vs terran is an unfair matchuo? You are just shifting the debate and everyone is falling into it. I dont really care about your speculations about zergs degree of completion or your speculations on their future development. I am more interested in discussing the idea of zerg vs terran and the difficulties i have been facing more and more as the entire terran player base is discovering more ways to exploit zergs
Then what I said is irrelevant to what you want to talk about. I, as someone who has played so little zerg, obviously know nothing of the race and can be of no help to you.
Then why are you in this thread? Oh yea, you're trolling.
On July 27 2010 05:40 Ruthless wrote: Ahout mech: although i do think it is hard to beat i know we can argue about map balance being the problem, but at the end of the day you are just agreeing that zvt is broken you just are blaming it on something else.
Mech aside, i think the matchup feels so hard for z because of the sheer amount of nearly unscoutable strategues all of which require a unique response to avoid falling way behind not to mention the amount of vulnerability zerg must submit to in order to take an advantage.
I will list all the strats i am thinking about when i have to play zerg. Early reaper. Reaper bunker rush Marine bunker rush Early hellions into expand Early hellions into more hellions Thor drop Hell8on maurader timing push Marine hellion iming push Banshees Banshees with cloak Thor.timing push Tank play
If i make the wrong choice on what your hiding behind the wall off. i literally have no chance. You pick the harrass and if i play too safe i have no way to punish you with my defensive slow units that die to one tank on the ridge. I dont play safe enough and four hellions kills 10 or more drones.
If terran expects mutas and gets a thor. And the flthree to four turrets it takes to cover two bases (lol). The thor can be dropped or used to great effect against ground.
If zerg goes muta and terran has five rines and a thor your out 1000-1400 resources for nothing because they die like paper to terran anti air.
I think I'm going to quote myself, much earlier in this thread in regards to this.
On July 27 2010 03:50 MythicalMage wrote: And, more importantly, and I know people aren't going to want to hear this, but Zerg is the least finished race. Wait for the zerg expansion, and then see what options you have.
Thats an explanation for why you agree with me tha zerg vs terran is an unfair matchuo? You are just shifting the debate and everyone is falling into it. I dont really care about your speculations about zergs degree of completion or your speculations on their future development. I am more interested in discussing the idea of zerg vs terran and the difficulties i have been facing more and more as the entire terran player base is discovering more ways to exploit zergs
Then what I said is irrelevant to what you want to talk about. I, as someone who has played so little zerg, obviously know nothing of the race and can be of no help to you.
Then why are you in this thread? Oh yea, you're trolling.
On July 27 2010 05:40 Ruthless wrote: Ahout mech: although i do think it is hard to beat i know we can argue about map balance being the problem, but at the end of the day you are just agreeing that zvt is broken you just are blaming it on something else.
Mech aside, i think the matchup feels so hard for z because of the sheer amount of nearly unscoutable strategues all of which require a unique response to avoid falling way behind not to mention the amount of vulnerability zerg must submit to in order to take an advantage.
I will list all the strats i am thinking about when i have to play zerg. Early reaper. Reaper bunker rush Marine bunker rush Early hellions into expand Early hellions into more hellions Thor drop Hell8on maurader timing push Marine hellion iming push Banshees Banshees with cloak Thor.timing push Tank play
If i make the wrong choice on what your hiding behind the wall off. i literally have no chance. You pick the harrass and if i play too safe i have no way to punish you with my defensive slow units that die to one tank on the ridge. I dont play safe enough and four hellions kills 10 or more drones.
If terran expects mutas and gets a thor. And the flthree to four turrets it takes to cover two bases (lol). The thor can be dropped or used to great effect against ground.
If zerg goes muta and terran has five rines and a thor your out 1000-1400 resources for nothing because they die like paper to terran anti air.
I think I'm going to quote myself, much earlier in this thread in regards to this.
On July 27 2010 03:50 MythicalMage wrote: And, more importantly, and I know people aren't going to want to hear this, but Zerg is the least finished race. Wait for the zerg expansion, and then see what options you have.
Thats an explanation for why you agree with me tha zerg vs terran is an unfair matchuo? You are just shifting the debate and everyone is falling into it. I dont really care about your speculations about zergs degree of completion or your speculations on their future development. I am more interested in discussing the idea of zerg vs terran and the difficulties i have been facing more and more as the entire terran player base is discovering more ways to exploit zergs
Then what I said is irrelevant to what you want to talk about. I, as someone who has played so little zerg, obviously know nothing of the race and can be of no help to you.
Then why are you in this thread? Oh yea, you're trolling.
I suspect he is here to farm his post-count
Well, unless he can change his name, it won't do him much good. No one reading this thread will do anything but laugh at his future posts.
I think people were trying really hard to keep it on track, but he replied to literally every post. I will repost my post, I really am curious to hear some feedback on it.
Ahout mech: although i do think it is hard to beat i know we can argue about map balance being the problem, but at the end of the day you are just agreeing that zvt is broken you just are blaming it on something else.
Mech aside, i think the matchup feels so hard for z because of the sheer amount of nearly unscoutable strategues all of which require a unique response to avoid falling way behind not to mention the amount of vulnerability zerg must submit to in order to take an advantage.
I will list all the strats i am thinking about when i have to play zerg. Early reaper. Reaper bunker rush Marine bunker rush Early hellions into expand Early hellions into more hellions Thor drop Hell8on maurader timing push Marine hellion iming push Banshees Banshees with cloak Thor.timing push Tank play
If i make the wrong choice on what your hiding behind the wall off. i literally have no chance. You pick the harrass and if i play too safe i have no way to punish you with my defensive slow units that die to one tank on the ridge. I dont play safe enough and four hellions kills 10 or more drones.
If terran expects mutas and gets a thor. And the flthree to four turrets it takes to cover two bases (lol). The thor can be dropped or used to great effect against ground.
If zerg goes muta and terran has five rines and a thor your out 1000-1400 resources for nothing because they die like paper to terran anti air.
Right. Well, here is my own weak attempt to right the ship. Does anyone have some specific knowledge on # of hits to kill for Thors to take out mutas, as well as the affects of upgrades on this dynamic?
Thors kill mutas in 3 hits regardless of armor upgrades I believe. Mutas are generally only useful in terran matches if you scout hellion/marauder. It is generally ineffective against any other unit composition. Also, 2+ turrets stop all early muta harassment.
I agree with the OP that Larva Injection is one of the most important mechanics that every zerg player should master. Keeping up with larva injection and fast expanding will get you the biggest army in game. But keeping tab on the injection is too micro intensive.
I don't mind thors killing mutalisks effortlessly, but I do mind that they do splash damage. What's the reasoning for giving Thor bonus damage against units like mutalisks, giving Thors tremendous aa range, and splash damage?
When playing in the dark I think going roaches combined with 1-2 spinecrawlers while teching to lair is generally a safe bet.
It should hold back most early unit composition harassment but will lose to all-in mass marauder.
While you're teching to lair you really have no choice but to sac 1-2 overlords to see their tech pattern and adjust accordingly. I would only go spire if he's going mass marauder or marauder/hellion otherwise I would just get burrow/moveburrow and mass roaches until you can determine whether or not you can safely expand/ transition to another tech.
On July 27 2010 06:13 Deathstar wrote: I don't mind thors killing mutalisks effortlessly, but I do mind that they do splash damage. What's the reasoning for giving Thor bonus damage against units like mutalisks, giving Thors tremendous aa range, and splash damage?
Thors were always strong against mutalisks even before the AA splash was added. In fact you could have just 1 thor and add a handful of marines and that's just as effective yet cheaper than adding a 2nd thor. I've never understood why blizz feels thors alone are justified to be such strong anti-air when their other options are just as viable without being overpowered.
Ruthless, I was going to list a bunch of things that Terrans are always worried about in TvZ, but I realized one major thing: US Zerg play has largely been uncreative for majority of the beta. The same openings we've seen from the beginning of the beta are still here today, except that roaches have been nerfed to the point where 1-base mass roach isn't viable anymore. We still see 14 pool 16 hatch, 14 hatch, and 14 pool/queen/hatch.
On the other hand, US Terran play has evolved greatly. 3 rax marauder, 1 rax FE, proxy rax reaper, fast banshee, 1/1/1, fast hellion, fast thorship, fast tank/bunker roll, mass viking into BCs, mass marine/ghost, marine/tank/raven push, bio-oriented drop harass, and so-on.
In addition, Zerg mid-game has been rather stale as well -- only recently have US Zergs begun to incorporate queens, infestors, burrow and drops into their play. In addition, I have rarely seen a Zerg timing push -- in fact, it seems like Zergs never consider timing into any of their games, they almost always play extremely passively, relying only on mutas to do their harass, and their macro to win their game for them.
It just seems to me the reason why TvZ seems so Terran favored is that Terran play has expanded greatly over the beta, while Zergs have just gotten by on the strength of their macro and mutas/ling/bling. Yes, now Terran has so many options -- does Zerg really only have like 2-3 openings and 2-3 mid game plays available to them?
The reason why Terran has expanded so much over the beta is because the have so many more options to do so. It's not because Zerg players just don't know how to innovate. I hate that argument.
This argument that zerg players are just less intelligent than terran/toss players needs to stop.
The one thing that I feel isn't explored enough is drop play. Other than that, yes, zerg really do have less openings and mid game plays available to them. Anything else?
Removing thor splash would be good for the MU i think, its not like they lack good anti air and I think they just went overboard, same goes for the now ridiculous phoenix, my grandma can now take out infinite of mutalisks with a couple of phoenixes
On July 27 2010 06:24 Happy.fairytail wrote: Yes, now Terran has so many options -- does Zerg really only have like 2-3 openings and 2-3 mid game plays available to them?
On July 27 2010 06:30 MonkeyKungFu wrote: Removing thor splash would be good for the MU i think, its not like they lack good anti air and I think they just went overboard, same goes for the now ridiculous phoenix, my grandma can now take out infinite of mutalisks with a couple of phoenixes
On July 27 2010 06:24 Happy.fairytail wrote: Ruthless, I was going to list a bunch of things that Terrans are always worried about in TvZ, but I realized one major thing: US Zerg play has largely been uncreative for majority of the beta. The same openings we've seen from the beginning of the beta are still here today, except that roaches have been nerfed to the point where 1-base mass roach isn't viable anymore. We still see 14 pool 16 hatch, 14 hatch, and 14 pool/queen/hatch.
On the other hand, US Terran play has evolved greatly. 3 rax marauder, 1 rax FE, proxy rax reaper, fast banshee, 1/1/1, fast hellion, fast thorship, fast tank/bunker roll, mass viking into BCs, mass marine/ghost, marine/tank/raven push, bio-oriented drop harass, and so-on.
In addition, Zerg mid-game has been rather stale as well -- only recently have US Zergs begun to incorporate queens, infestors, burrow and drops into their play. In addition, I have rarely seen a Zerg timing push -- in fact, it seems like Zergs never consider timing into any of their games, they almost always play extremely passively, relying only on mutas to do their harass, and their macro to win their game for them.
It just seems to me the reason why TvZ seems so Terran favored is that Terran play has expanded greatly over the beta, while Zergs have just gotten by on the strength of their macro and mutas/ling/bling. Yes, now Terran has so many options -- does Zerg really only have like 2-3 openings and 2-3 mid game plays available to them?
This has been my feeling as well. I have played on europe a lot as well though. The problem I feel with zergs timing pushes and aggressive alternatives to 14 pool 15 hatch is that it makes me feel too all in. I have a number of timing pushes for a terran who expands in my mind. But that tank on the ridge and a slow tank push down the ramp for the expo makes me feel so hesitant to do something like an early push to try to shut it down.
I feel like I have spent a lot of time trying different strategies but none have made me feel as confident as basically trying to out defend my opponent while macroing. (each one of the responses to the terran harrasses I listed is a different strategy in my mind).
Zerg in SC2 at the current state of game play is definetly in the reactive position. If zerg beats back a timing push of some sort their best response is to macro harder with the advantage. I feel like if i destroy a terran drop play or stop his banshees he will have a few tanks sieged up covering his expo in a way that I have a very hard time breaking it to return the damage. So I will just power more drones.
I feel like im trying to push a gimic if I get aggressive with zerg vs terran. I feel more free to try these things against protoss where I feel on a more level footing. (the one base roach build dimaga used vs whitera is something I actually like quite a lot vs the fast expanding toss and have used for a while).
If anything I feel like terran players can just do anything and it will have a good success rate while zerg feels to me like a struggle to survive and out control the massive amounts of early harrass well enough to be able to win the big fight via having almost double the economy.
I think a good compromise solution would be to alter the way the splash is dealt. Instead of dealing X damage to one unit and X/Y damage to all surrounding units, why not spread a fixed amount of damage over all units in the radius and possibly tweak rebalance around that? That way, each thor attack does, say, 60 dmg. If there are 2 Mutas in range that is 30 damage to each, 3 mutas = 20 damage to each, etc. That would make Thors more useful against spread out mutas while also not making them rape all mutalisks.
Muta-stacking would probably be pretty OP then though, huh? What are your thoughts on this idea?
Chill man, I wasn't saying zerg players are less intelligent. Trust me, I'd never say that, because I'm sick of hearing arguments that zerg players are more skilled and terran takes no skill.
What I am saying is that I think 1-base zerg play has not been explored even close to the full extent. And I've never, ever seen a zerg even attempt a fast ling overlord drop, fast nydus, fast infestor, fast ultralisk, and fast broodlord. And I feel like zerg's mid-game play has not been explored to the full extent either. Why is the zerg mid-game almost always mass muta/ling/bling or roach/hydra?
I mean, I gotta say, if Zerg innovation is over, that really sucks for you guys. Because seriously ... zerg play has been pretty stagnant this whole beta (at least compared to Terran), in my opinion...
On July 27 2010 06:30 MonkeyKungFu wrote: Removing thor splash would be good for the MU i think, its not like they lack good anti air and I think they just went overboard, same goes for the now ridiculous phoenix, my grandma can now take out infinite of mutalisks with a couple of phoenixes
If you see phoenix you should stop building mutalisks and build corruptors instead. They do very well against phoenix and will get you back control of the air.
On July 27 2010 06:37 Happy.fairytail wrote: Chill man, I wasn't saying zerg players are less intelligent. Trust me, I'd never say that, because I'm sick of hearing arguments that zerg players are more skilled and terran takes no skill.
What I am saying is that I think 1-base zerg play has not been explored even close to the full extent. And I've never, ever seen a zerg even attempt a fast ling overlord drop, fast nydus, fast infestor, fast ultralisk, and fast broodlord. And I feel like zerg's mid-game play has not been explored to the full extent either. Why is the zerg mid-game almost always mass muta/ling/bling or roach/hydra?
I mean, I gotta say, if Zerg innovation is over, that really sucks for you guys. Because seriously ... zerg play has been pretty stagnant this whole beta (at least compared to Terran), in my opinion...
The drop play and fast infestor could be explored but as far fast nydus, fast ultralisk, fast broodlord those are not viable against any competent opponent.
Fast nydus requires a minimum of 300/300 and your opponent being so incompetent that he still has fog of war in his base in the mid-game.
Fast ultralisk and fast broodlord is kind of a ridiculous idea, don't you think? All terran and toss players make timing pushes or have some sort of aggression that makes this impossible. Zerg always has to have a sizeable mid-game army in order to survive just to get to those tier 3.5 units and all of this costs a lot of gas. And what does this mid-game army consist of? Yes that stagnant roach/hydra or muta/ling composition that everyone is so bored of.
All Im saying is the phoenix is too easy to micro since you dont need to micro. Im not saying mutas should beat phoenixes or anything, but right now its too easy to use imho. And the reason I dislike thor splash is that 4 thors takes out infinite numbers of mutas, you should somewhat be able to overcome you opponents by sheer numbers. Im not saying that units that create "wow moments" that completely switches up the game should be removed, but thor is just not one of those units. Maybe the thor AA should be more like the seeker missile and be dodgable with great micro, at least i want it changed.
Doomfox, fast thorship requires Starport/Medivac, which is 250/200. And are you saying offensive nydus is useless in any mid-game?
Fast ultra/brolord is just as ridiculous as a fast thor/BC. And yeah, fast BC is probably pretty dumb, but I've never even seen zerg try it. The only 1-base play I've ever seen was baneling bust.
Nowadays, we've been seeing BCs (the so-called worst Terran unit) in top-level play as well as Raven hunter-seeker missile use. We've been seeing very effective bio-based drops in mid-game.
Could we really not see zerg's doing counter drops with 1 roach + 4 banelings to completely kill a whole mineral line? Could we really not see more ultra, brolord, infestor and queen play?
On July 27 2010 06:52 Happy.fairytail wrote: Doomfox, fast thorship requires Starport/Medivac, which is 250/200. And are you saying offensive nydus is useless in any mid-game?
Fast ultra/brolord is just as ridiculous as a fast thor/BC. And yeah, fast BC is probably pretty dumb, but I've never even seen zerg try it. The only 1-base play I've ever seen was baneling bust.
Nowadays, we've been seeing BCs (the so-called worst Terran unit) in top-level play as well as Raven hunter-seeker missile use. We've been seeing very effective bio-based drops in mid-game.
Could we really not see zerg's doing counter drops with 1 roach + 4 banelings to completely kill a whole mineral line? Could we really not see more ultra, brolord, infestor and queen play?
I'm not saying offensive nydus or ultra/brood/infestor play is not viable. You asked whether or not FAST nydus, ultra/brood play is viable. And I said I don't believe it is and then stated why, based on my experiences.
Also, I don't think anyone believed battlecruisers were ever weak.
Edit: Also, fast BC can be viable because terran can easily wall-off and defend their choke/base with minimal resources. Zerg can not, ever, fast tech to tier 3.5 with just a handful of lings/roaches/anything.
On July 27 2010 06:24 Happy.fairytail wrote: In addition, Zerg mid-game has been rather stale as well -- only recently have US Zergs begun to incorporate queens, infestors, burrow and drops into their play. In addition, I have rarely seen a Zerg timing push -- in fact, it seems like Zergs never consider timing into any of their games, they almost always play extremely passively, relying only on mutas to do their harass, and their macro to win their game for them.
It just seems to me the reason why TvZ seems so Terran favored is that Terran play has expanded greatly over the beta, while Zergs have just gotten by on the strength of their macro and mutas/ling/bling. Yes, now Terran has so many options -- does Zerg really only have like 2-3 openings and 2-3 mid game plays available to them?
I would like to comment on this post.
Because of the huge variety of terran openings, you HAVE to play passively. You can't get a ling timing-push in because if the terran decides for a hellion-igniter push, you're toast. Not only that, but a wall in with an scv repairing it blocks ling agression.
A baneling is only good for one shot, and takes up 50 minerals and 25 gas, which you WILL lose. Although very strong, its not very reliable to make a timing push with pure banelings.
Queens are slow off creep and hardly strong against a couple of marauders.
Roaches have a tiny tiny range, and require 2 upgrades to get a good use of their cloaking abilities. Not to mention they are hard countered by marauders, banshees, tanks and thors behind a wall.
The zerg is not incapable of doing a timing push, however, they rely on deflecting the first push of a terran. Because the terran has a huge array of options layed out for him, he picks one and you follow the dance, not the other way round. Once you correctly scouted and deflected the push, then its zergs time to lead.
Zerg is the macro race, no way around it. But if you can't get that macro going, for instance in the early or midgame, it becomes increasingly hard to get the advantage. As Zerg you need the macro advantage. You won't get any miracles handed to you like you would have by for instance a well placed nuke or a tank behind a solid wall, if you lose the macro war, you're pretty much toast. Because your units are the weakest you need to be able to produce more than the enemy, thus you need a bigger economy then them. It generally doesn't help the zergs economy that terran has a whole bible worth of harrasment units and tactics.
As many others have said. A wall is the terrans best asset in the early game, the zerg lack this and hence have to rely on scouting and countering.
Lategame Zerg is more than fine, its the midgame that's hard to get through.
On July 27 2010 06:35 Ruthless wrote: This has been my feeling as well. I have played on europe a lot as well though. The problem I feel with zergs timing pushes and aggressive alternatives to 14 pool 15 hatch is that it makes me feel too all in. I have a number of timing pushes for a terran who expands in my mind. But that tank on the ridge and a slow tank push down the ramp for the expo makes me feel so hesitant to do something like an early push to try to shut it down.
I feel like I have spent a lot of time trying different strategies but none have made me feel as confident as basically trying to out defend my opponent while macroing. (each one of the responses to the terran harrasses I listed is a different strategy in my mind).
Zerg in SC2 at the current state of game play is definetly in the reactive position. If zerg beats back a timing push of some sort their best response is to macro harder with the advantage. I feel like if i destroy a terran drop play or stop his banshees he will have a few tanks sieged up covering his expo in a way that I have a very hard time breaking it to return the damage. So I will just power more drones.
I feel like im trying to push a gimic if I get aggressive with zerg vs terran. I feel more free to try these things against protoss where I feel on a more level footing. (the one base roach build dimaga used vs whitera is something I actually like quite a lot vs the fast expanding toss and have used for a while).
If anything I feel like terran players can just do anything and it will have a good success rate while zerg feels to me like a struggle to survive and out control the massive amounts of early harrass well enough to be able to win the big fight via having almost double the economy.
I think you said it quick well. Because Terran is the aggressor almost every TvZ, Zerg "feels like a struggle to survive", because they're playing the macro game every time. And yes, that's the safe and smart play.
But seriously ... I think Zergs have not explored their offensive options very much, which you admit. There are no build orders out there for going fast/mass half the units you have... why is that??
What you say about timing attacks is exactly right, and it's not unique to Zergs. If a Terran or Protoss fails in a timing attack, I'm pretty sure they lose the game too. All three races have ways to catch up -- they all can macro, they all can harass to get back in the game.
I guess I just want to put out there that most zergs rely too much on their macro by playing passively, and now that Terran has innovated multiple harass plays/early timing pushes to win, it's up to Zerg to figure out early harass/timing push counters, as well as early harass/timing attacks of their own.
On July 27 2010 06:37 Happy.fairytail wrote: What I am saying is that I think 1-base zerg play has not been explored even close to the full extent. And I've never, ever seen a zerg even attempt a fast ling overlord drop, fast nydus, fast infestor, fast ultralisk, and fast broodlord. And I feel like zerg's mid-game play has not been explored to the full extent either. Why is the zerg mid-game almost always mass muta/ling/bling or roach/hydra?
You haven't seen fast broodlord/ultra because it's literally impossible. Under absolute ideal circumstances you can get your first ultra out at about the 11 minute mark. And that's going almost completely ling so you have the 550 gas required just to tech to Ultra and then have gas to actually produce them. Add in hydras or roaches and you slow that down further.
On July 27 2010 06:44 DoomFox wrote: The drop play and fast infestor could be explored but as far fast nydus, fast ultralisk, fast broodlord those are not viable against any competent opponent.
I would be weary of fast infestors for the same reasons as ultras and broods. Infestors take roughly twice as long to build as roaches/hydras (50 vs. 27/33) and cost 3x the gas (150 vs. 50/25). Also without pathogen glands, they come into play without the ability to immediately contribute to your army. Any fast infestor play would be susceptible to early pushes.
I agree that drops are one promising avenue for zerg agression in the mid-to-late game, the only problem being that it takes an eon to research. See for example:
Game 3 of Idra vs. TLO: immediate counter-offensive with roaches utlizing drops.
Also, I'm interested in seeing more baneling drops being explored as properly microed overlords can deliver their payload even in the face of small-to-medium anti-air opposition.
On July 27 2010 06:57 Chaosvuistje wrote: I would like to comment on this post.
Because of the huge variety of terran openings, you HAVE to play passively. You can't get a ling timing-push in because if the terran decides for a hellion-igniter push, you're toast. Not only that, but a wall in with an scv repairing it blocks ling agression.
A baneling is only good for one shot, and takes up 50 minerals and 25 gas, which you WILL lose. Although very strong, its not very reliable to make a timing push with pure banelings.
Queens are slow off creep and hardly strong against a couple of marauders.
I was referring to getting quick overlord speed/drop, and doing a ling drop to get around the chokes. Probably much more gas efficient than muta harass, and Terran probably won't be able to scout this kind of harass coming, whereas they can scan your spire. I mean, Zergs are already starting to do infestor drops with fungal growth/infested marine (kinda like Raven harass), why not just do good ol' zergling scv harass?
And what about Ultra drops for main base buildilng harass? (And you can always extract your ultras out you know, it doesn't have to be a doom drop .. vikings are rather slow!)
And I wonder why Zergs never use overlords to shuttle their queens around? I mean, isn't this what Toss do in BW all the time with their reavers?
And I wonder why Zerg aren't more aggressive with map control? Mass vikings are owned by fungal growth + hydras. I feel like zerg should own the air every single game.
I feel like there is still yet creativity to be explored...!
On July 27 2010 07:24 Happy.fairytail wrote: And I wonder why Zergs never use overlords to shuttle their queens around? I mean, isn't this what Toss do in BW all the time with their reavers?
And I wonder why Zerg aren't more aggressive with map control? Mass vikings are owned by fungal growth + hydras. I feel like zerg should own the air every single game.
I feel like there is still yet creativity to be explored...!
Can you be more specific with what you're trying to accomplish using queen/overlord drop? If you're talking about spreading creep everywhere that is accomplished by being proactive in the first place with creep tumors and makes this unnecessary. I hope you don't mean using queens offensively because they don't do a lot of damage and transfuse is limited in it's use.
Aggressive map control using...hydras and infestors? Hydras and infestors come out slower than vikings can kill a few overlords. Not to mention hydras + map control is a contradictory idea because hydralisks are incredibly slow and are limited to being defensive on creep or drop play or big a-move death marches. You will never get hydras AND infestors at the same time to counter early viking harass. Not to mention that if the terran has somehow tricked you into building hydralisks then you deserve to lose to the inevitable tank push.
No offense but it seems you're calling out for "creativity" for the sake of being creative, as opposed to creativity leading to "viable" strategies. 2 hatch mass drone rush is creative but it's not exactly viable.
On July 27 2010 07:24 Happy.fairytail wrote: And I wonder why Zergs never use overlords to shuttle their queens around? I mean, isn't this what Toss do in BW all the time with their reavers?
And I wonder why Zerg aren't more aggressive with map control? Mass vikings are owned by fungal growth + hydras. I feel like zerg should own the air every single game.
I feel like there is still yet creativity to be explored...!
Can you be more specific with what you're trying to accomplish using queen/overlord drop? If you're talking about spreading creep everywhere that is accomplished by being proactive in the first place with creep tumors and makes this unnecessary. I hope you don't mean using queens offensively because they don't do a lot of damage and transfuse is limited in it's use.
Aggressive map control using...hydras and infestors? Hydras and infestors come out slower than vikings can kill a few overlords. Not to mention hydras + map control is a contradictory idea because hydralisks are incredibly slow and are limited to being defensive on creep or drop play or big a-move death marches. You will never get hydras AND infestors at the same time to counter early viking harass. Not to mention that if the terran has somehow tricked you into building hydralisks then you deserve to lose to the inevitable tank push.
No offense but it seems you're calling out for "creativity" for the sake of being creative, as opposed to creativity leading to "viable" strategies. 2 hatch mass drone rush is creative but it's not exactly viable.
I'll go ahead and refine it for him, since you're evidently speaking as much out of your ass as those you condemn.
Using overlords to ferry queens about is actually a very good way to spread creep, since you get to lay a tumor where there was no creep initially, you get the full radial benefit of it's spread. This is opposed to, of course, spreading creep from the edge of your own creep, which only receives half of the radial benefit. Technically your creep can advance twice as quickly once you hit lair tech and can manage your pathways with overlords.
Also, I'm pretty sure he was just referring to hydras/Infestors as a generally good AA, which they are. Hydras or Infestors on their own have no trouble creating a boundary that kills unwary vikings, as the harass begins to return less than you get for it. Also, you can switch the production between the two whenever you want really. Hydras and Infestors at the same time doesn't work well, but Hydras, THEN Infestor/Speedling works great. Then you can go back to Hydras and possibly even pepper banelings into your mix. The Zerg macro system is somewhat harsh, but very, very malleable once you get it down.
On July 27 2010 07:49 Happy.fairytail wrote: Well I guess we can agree to disagree. Where I see unexplored build orders and tactics, you see 2 hatch mass drone rush lol
Oh well, I'm going to switch to Zerg anyway =] see you in a few
Indeed. We can all creatively create ourselves into a losing w/l ratio. GL
On July 27 2010 07:51 JinjoBust wrote: I'll go ahead and refine it for him, since you're evidently speaking as much out of your ass as those you condemn.
Using overlords to ferry queens about is actually a very good way to spread creep, since you get to lay a tumor where there was no creep initially, you get the full radial benefit of it's spread. This is opposed to, of course, spreading creep from the edge of your own creep, which only receives half of the radial benefit. Technically your creep can advance twice as quickly once you hit lair tech and can manage your pathways with overlords.
Also, I'm pretty sure he was just referring to hydras/Infestors as a generally good AA, which they are. Hydras or Infestors on their own have no trouble creating a boundary that kills unwary vikings, as the harass begins to return less than you get for it. Also, you can switch the production between the two whenever you want really. Hydras and Infestors at the same time doesn't work well, but Hydras, THEN Infestor/Speedling works great. Then you can go back to Hydras and possibly even pepper banelings into your mix. The Zerg macro system is somewhat harsh, but very, very malleable once you get it down.
See, the hydra/infestor combo you just clarified I have no problem with. But the queen/overlord, as far as I'm concerned isn't necessary.
I've been using a 13 pool/ queen/ queen/ build which allows to me never skip a beat on larva inject and use all of the 2nd queens energy on making 6-7 creep tumors at the start of the game.
By the time lair tech arrives, my creep has expanded to nearly halfway across the map already no exageration. And by mid-game the creep is already at his front door, assuming he isn't already clearing your tumors with detection. Sorry I should have clarified why I felt that strat was unecessary.
I've noticed that, so far in this thread at least, that most non-Zerg players (myself included to some extent, I'm sure) are at a loss as to why Zerg players are dissatisfied with their race.
Besides aesthetics (personally, I find the Zerg to have rather bad@$$ looking units) and "coolness" (straight-up speed upgrades instead of "Charge" or "Blink", for example) what is it that really makes Zerg players feel underpowered? It's not that their units need improvement in general -- good Zergs feel competitive with Protoss. It's not against MMM bio either, which is shut down by banelings and infestors. It's biomech or pure mech that causes problems.
Then again, I doubt it's really endgame mech/biomech either that really gets under the skin of non-pro Zergs, since T3 Zerg can be pretty competitive with mech/biomech (or at least force the Terran to branch out in tech drastically, like forcing a ton of Vikings if the Zerg masses Broodlords & Corruptors, which means less supply for Thors and tanks).
It sounds like it's the midgame that Zergs have issue with. If they open Mutalisks, they can harass but not well enough to deter the Terran from simply pushing out and leveling his base (and the Zerg can't stop it because with all their gas into Mutas, they don't have an army that can compete with mech at that stage).
How can Zergs make their mid-T2 and T2/T3 transition stronger against mech heavy play?
I was really impressed by how IdrA handled TLO's terran mech when he opened with Muta harass and transitioned into Roaches. It seems like that could be an answer to early mech pushes (I think TLO had like 8 Hellions, 3 Thors and 3 tanks?). However, if I recall correctly, they were cross-positioned on Metalopolis. Something tells me that if the distance had been closer, IdrA may not have gotten enough Roaches in time to successfully fight it off (he waited until the last possible second to engage TLO).
It doesn't seem like a reliable counter, even though it did work. The counter needs to be reliable even on small maps -- it's not balanced for Zerg if it's just an auto-loss to mech every time the map comes up Blistering Sands.
OFF-TOPIC: Did anybody else cringe hard in the Battlecruiser IdrA v. TLO match? Something tells me IdrA didn't know that they changed Neural Parasite... he would have won if he had put the gas into corruptors instead...
"Did anybody else cringe hard in the Battlecruiser IdrA v. TLO match? Something tells me IdrA didn't know that they changed Neural Parasite... he would have won if he had put the gas into corruptors instead..."
Think everyone did. But really the problem was he didnt focus down the ones he had under control. Like he would take control and then just wait it out and then... die I guess.
But yeah seems like its the midgame as you said thats the problem. I personally feel like its the lag of AoE. Fungal is just bad compared to siege tanks, helions, storm and collu. And banelings are really only good against lightarmored targets like marines and helions.
When zerg hits T3 they shouldnt be complaining about anything, ultras and broodlords are pretty damn sick.
On July 27 2010 08:22 Toxigen wrote: I've noticed that, so far in this thread at least, that most non-Zerg players (myself included to some extent, I'm sure) are at a loss as to why Zerg players are dissatisfied with their race.
Besides aesthetics (personally, I find the Zerg to have rather bad@$$ looking units) and "coolness" (straight-up speed upgrades instead of "Charge" or "Blink", for example) what is it that really makes Zerg players feel underpowered? It's not that their units need improvement in general -- good Zergs feel competitive with Protoss. It's not against MMM bio either, which is shut down by banelings and infestors. It's biomech or pure mech that causes problems.
Then again, I doubt it's really endgame mech/biomech either that really gets under the skin of non-pro Zergs, since T3 Zerg can be pretty competitive with mech/biomech (or at least force the Terran to branch out in tech drastically, like forcing a ton of Vikings if the Zerg masses Broodlords & Corruptors, which means less supply for Thors and tanks).
It sounds like it's the midgame that Zergs have issue with. If they open Mutalisks, they can harass but not well enough to deter the Terran from simply pushing out and leveling his base (and the Zerg can't stop it because with all their gas into Mutas, they don't have an army that can compete with mech at that stage).
How can Zergs make their mid-T2 and T2/T3 transition stronger against mech heavy play?
I was really impressed by how IdrA handled TLO's terran mech when he opened with Muta harass and transitioned into Roaches. It seems like that could be an answer to early mech pushes (I think TLO had like 8 Hellions, 3 Thors and 3 tanks?). However, if I recall correctly, they were cross-positioned on Metalopolis. Something tells me that if the distance had been closer, IdrA may not have gotten enough Roaches in time to successfully fight it off (he waited until the last possible second to engage TLO).
It doesn't seem like a reliable counter, even though it did work. The counter needs to be reliable even on small maps -- it's not balanced for Zerg if it's just an auto-loss to mech every time the map comes up Blistering Sands.
OFF-TOPIC: Did anybody else cringe hard in the Battlecruiser IdrA v. TLO match? Something tells me IdrA didn't know that they changed Neural Parasite... he would have won if he had put the gas into corruptors instead...
I think you're the first non-zerg player in this thread who actually understands what's going on with zerg.
On July 27 2010 07:01 OHtRUe wrote: The problem is I could create a gigantic list of why zerg is bad that overshadows your terrible list of Why Zerg is Good~
Ha this is the truest post of them all. I have friends. That played BW regularly with me back in the days but didnt keep with it as long as i did. And when they watch me play sc2 they just go holy crap terran and protoss have cool shit. Why are you playing Zerg? And i dont have any answer other than im a Zerg devoted player. I can admit they suck horribly .
I lol everytime i see the 100s of posts from players saying zerg doesnt suck.. its just the players that play zerg. hahaha get real.
Basically zerg play is suvive cheese, harassment, timing pushes etc. whatever is thrown at you. Until you finally crush their whole army in one ill fated battle. Then Zerg macro gives you the win.
Theres baneling busts drop/worm play that can get you a few wins. But other than that theres no innovation to be had. You cant win unless you crush terran or protoss whole army. Which is the hard part. Its not hard for terran or protoss to crush your army over and over again. But its not hard to rebuild your zerg army either.
My only advice to fellow Zerg is to always have 2 extra expos that arent even satured maybe just gas. Saturating more than 4 bases just wastes your supply. its a shame you cant morph drones to banelings or something useful to get your supply back without wasting too much money. (creep tumors plz blizzard) crawlers are too expensive and useless.
1.SO you have a place to send your drones when inevitably one of your working expansions dies. 2. you have something to stall if they choose to kill your pointless hatcherys. 3. extra larva.
Well, all you people basing which race is the best on how a few players (just 2?!) do as zerg, don't understand statistics. If I flip a coin three times, there is a chance I'll get heads 3x in a row. OMG!!! The coin's rigged! Imba IMBA!!!! That's as silly as those ID proponents saying that the universe in which we exist is so unlikely to have come to be on its own that it is thus impossible that it wasn't "guided by a divine hand". Perhaps all permutations of the universe are equally unlikely, but some permutation (1 out infinity possibilities?) must be the one to exist... Just as I can roll 10 d10's, and any combination that I roll has a 1:10^10 chance of being rolled, and thus the chances of a roll such as: <1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1> had the probability of 1:10^10 of being rolled, so I must not have rolled it, but rather place it that way... OMG! the dice are IMBA!!
Any statistician will tell you that such a low N (sample size) of 2 Zerg players will not give you accurate results. Get a large number of each, say 1000 terran players, 1000 protoss, and 1000 zerg, and then if the zerg always lose, you might be on to something in crying "IMBA!!!" though there's still a chance you're wrong, yet then I would be inclined to agree, given such evidence. But over just a single KOTB, quit QQ'ing IMBA, Zerg are still awesome.
To further refute this argument, imagine if people were to say that there were more top chess players whom came from a communist country, and thus communism must be OP'd in comparison to a silly capitalist society only capable of making one gem such as, oh, Bobby Fischer... It would just as silly to say that since Fischer beat them all that one time that capitalism is the superior society. Perhaps one group of people happen to play better than the other group, not necessarily due to the group from which they came, but perhaps by sheer luck of where they spawned (or picked as a fave race, in terms of SC2). Perhaps, as in SC2, there just happen to be better skilled players who prefer protoss and terran.
No, perhaps the people at the top who aren't Zerg, at the moment, happen to be better, perhaps Idra and Dimaga were off there game on the replays we saw. (OMG, 2 really good Zerg, but just two players, and keep in mind Idra apparently has a win:loss ratio of games played of 5:4, which is nothing at which to sneeze.)
Sheth as Zerg, beat LZGamer as Terran in the ICCup portion of the Day9 opening party Take that you Zerg haters. And who said Zerg doesn't have nukes?! It's called banelings (with fungal growth makes it better), yo
This is just a heads up...people have been saying this for a lot longer than the KOTB has been going on. While I'm sure you felt really empowered writing that wall of text, there have been hundreds, if not thousands of players that have been very vocal about it on this board. People aren't basing this on how pro-gamers are doing; they're basing it on their own experiences. No idea how you could have misunderstood that.
While I'm sure you felt very impowered by your rebuke, I assure you many have been using the recent games to justify their opinions, which yes, were based on their own inabilities to play well as Zerg. I did not misunderstand that, I realize people have been qq'ing for some time now that Zerg are the nerfed race, but I was upset about several of the posts in this thread using the recent games as "evidence."
yes now that a zerg won _one tournament_ there can be no doubt: zerg is powerfull..........ffs mybe idra won because he is MUCH MUCH better player that littererly gets paid to play infron of audiences..
Zerg offcreep are just to slow except speedlings, but they are easily countered by every race
Zerg? make one baneling, or roaches. Protos? zealot ff stalker, or collosus? or blinkstalkers Terran hellion reaper tanks..
This means Z is no threat earlygame, so you are forced to play a reactionary style..and Z units dont really serve that purpose well, because they DIE so fast ....
it can be real frustrating getting a 200 pop army only to lose the fight at your doorstep and not having the time to rebuild your force eventhough you had a clear economic advantage...
Perhaps Z's have to learn to fight offcreep, that way you could reinforce much easier..
Imo the 'broken' units in Z are corrupters: obviously broken..wtf is this unit supposed to serve as anti collosus? hows that gonna work against stalkers sentry, blink etc.. counters BC/carriers. granted..but those units are not really a problem in 99.9% of the games due to obvious reasons.
Hydralisk: way to slow offcreep, practiclly unmicroable. I dunno what to do about them....they can easily become overpowred if blizz improve their movementspeed... but they need something imo, they are crazy good defensively on creep.
roaches: nerfed into oblivion.. the 2 food is really hurting once you near maxed out army, the unit itself is very good... personally I think that roaches would be a lot stronger if they raised the supply cap to something like 250 possibly 300. Its way to easy to cap out when building roaches, and they are really needed.. makes u lose a lot of fight were you have higher food count, better upgrades and better positioning simpyl because some higherpower determined that you could only have 200 supply :-(
infestors: neural parasite was way to good, true. But now it is just retarded bad. perhaps a compromise? it needs something because rite now I much rather go brood lord, which is saying A LOT.
obviously Im not asking for a buff on every single unit I talked about... Im just detailing my personal opinion on how they feel to me.
Perhaps the metagame will change and we will be in here complaining about Z imba like in early beta, but right now it feels like I need to play way better as Z than as T to beat my opponents, and I bealive I have played way more Z.
My first TL post =) hello everyone. I'm sure this is just rehashing what others have said but whatever...
a little background: I started playing in the beta in late april. I've played 2 games as terran and one as protoss, and a few hundred as zerg.
i wouldnt say I'm a great player but I am decent. I am currently in a platinum league in retail and have won more then 50% of my games so far.
playing as zerg is very frustrating sometimes, especially in the early/mid game and especially against a meching terran.
brood lords make it all worthwhile right now though. people hate on these units it seems like. 90% of the time I get them out I win though. the element of surprise probably helps, no one seems to expect these.
ive had some success with rushing brood lords actually. i started working on this in the beta and have won 2 live games with this strat against meching terrans, albeit the timing was very close on his attack and the BL's popping. once they do pop they wipe up the mech ball quickly.
i think i made it sound too easy. it is not easy to do this and very risky, but if it is successful you will more then likely win.
On July 27 2010 10:02 DuncanIdaho wrote: Well, all you people basing which race is the best on how a few players (just 2?!) do as zerg, don't understand statistics. If I flip a coin three times, there is a chance I'll get heads 3x in a row. OMG!!! The coin's rigged! Imba IMBA!!!! That's as silly as those ID proponents saying that the universe in which we exist is so unlikely to have come to be on its own that it is thus impossible that it wasn't "guided by a divine hand". Perhaps all permutations of the universe are equally unlikely, but some permutation (1 out infinity possibilities?) must be the one to exist... Just as I can roll 10 d10's, and any combination that I roll has a 1:10^10 chance of being rolled, and thus the chances of a roll such as: <1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1> had the probability of 1:10^10 of being rolled, so I must not have rolled it, but rather place it that way... OMG! the dice are IMBA!!
Any statistician will tell you that such a low N (sample size) of 2 Zerg players will not give you accurate results. Get a large number of each, say 1000 terran players, 1000 protoss, and 1000 zerg, and then if the zerg always lose, you might be on to something in crying "IMBA!!!" though there's still a chance you're wrong, yet then I would be inclined to agree, given such evidence. But over just a single KOTB, quit QQ'ing IMBA, Zerg are still awesome.
To further refute this argument, imagine if people were to say that there were more top chess players whom came from a communist country, and thus communism must be OP'd in comparison to a silly capitalist society only capable of making one gem such as, oh, Bobby Fischer... It would just as silly to say that since Fischer beat them all that one time that capitalism is the superior society. Perhaps one group of people happen to play better than the other group, not necessarily due to the group from which they came, but perhaps by sheer luck of where they spawned (or picked as a fave race, in terms of SC2). Perhaps, as in SC2, there just happen to be better skilled players who prefer protoss and terran.
No, perhaps the people at the top who aren't Zerg, at the moment, happen to be better, perhaps Idra and Dimaga were off there game on the replays we saw. (OMG, 2 really good Zerg, but just two players, and keep in mind Idra apparently has a win:loss ratio of games played of 5:4, which is nothing at which to sneeze.)
Your math teacher is very proud of you, I am sure... but exactly how does this relate to the presented ARGUMENTS with regard to the identified issues Zergs face, for instance, against Terran Mech and Biomech in midgame? I, for one, did not see anybody in this thread going "OMG IDRA lost as ZERG ergo Zerg = Shit". Had you used your wits to, for instance, propose viable counters for Zerg, like others did, your line of reasoning might have been more productive.
Alright, well, I came back to this topic, and I have to say: I AM NOT DISAPPOINTED!!
I am throughly convinced now by the brilliant posts on here that the full breadth of strategies and tactics that can be utilized by all the races have been worked out, and obviously Zerg is underpowered.
~6 months of beta play-time and 1 and 1/2 day of retail release is clearly long enough to determine everything about this game, I mean, pro BW wasn't having 1-base play for more than a week, right?
On July 29 2010 01:32 DanielD wrote: Alright, well, I came back to this topic, and I have to say: I AM NOT DISAPPOINTED!!
I am throughly convinced now by the brilliant posts on here that the full breadth of strategies and tactics that can be utilized by all the races have been worked out, and obviously Zerg is underpowered.
~6 months of beta play-time and 1 and 1/2 day of retail release is clearly long enough to determine everything about this game, I mean, pro BW wasn't having 1-base play for more than a week, right?
Who said all is worked out and we know everything about the game (except you)?
Your argument is "There might be tactics out there that noone discovered, thus dont do balance changes"? If I didnt understand correctly, then please explain.
Then why do Blizzard do balance patches at all when there is undiscovered tactics that *might* beat what is thought as unbalanced? For example Blizzard nerfed roaches, but they should not have done that because we have not discovered all the tactics, according to your logic..
On July 29 2010 01:32 DanielD wrote: Alright, well, I came back to this topic, and I have to say: I AM NOT DISAPPOINTED!!
I am throughly convinced now by the brilliant posts on here that the full breadth of strategies and tactics that can be utilized by all the races have been worked out, and obviously Zerg is underpowered.
~6 months of beta play-time and 1 and 1/2 day of retail release is clearly long enough to determine everything about this game, I mean, pro BW wasn't having 1-base play for more than a week, right?
annoying post... so we cant discuss balance until sc2 is ten years old? dont you think people in scbw discussed balance ? >.< how do you think the game got balanced?
Any statistician will tell you that such a low N (sample size) of 2 Zerg players will not give you accurate results. Get a large number of each, say 1000 terran players, 1000 protoss, and 1000 zerg, and then if the zerg always lose, you might be on to something in crying "IMBA!!!" though there's still a chance you're wrong, yet then I would be inclined to agree, given such evidence.
The one thing I don't dig about Zerg atm is the lack of T1 air that you can build in order to react to a play. It's almost impossible to react to a banshee or void that you aren't prepared for since queens take so long to be produced.
Any statistician will tell you that such a low N (sample size) of 2 Zerg players will not give you accurate results. Get a large number of each, say 1000 terran players, 1000 protoss, and 1000 zerg, and then if the zerg always lose, you might be on to something in crying "IMBA!!!" though there's still a chance you're wrong, yet then I would be inclined to agree, given such evidence.
But remember: Stats are like bikinis. They reveal interesting stuff, but think about what they hide.
Very nice link there, thank you. It appears there are less Zerg, but 20% is nothing too small.
However, stats are awesome, of course, and you can't fool another statistician easily, just because the media and marketing misuses it doesn't mean there's something wrong with the philosophy as a whole. As a Statistician (and yes, whoever in the hell said my "math teacher" is proud of me((I'm too lazy to go back and quote you, nor do you deserve my effort in doing so)), I'll have you know that I teach statistics at a Big 12 University to undergraduates, while attending grad school there, majoring in, oh, statistics, so perhaps I am in my realm of expertise and have the right to speak about it (the major is quantitative psychology to be exact).
But anyways, I apologize for my anti-nerd rage, nerd-rage, but I've made posts in several topics refuting those on here complaining about terran mech and bio balls and how supposedly Zerg have nothing, that we should be able to blindly sit at our base, queue up 200 food (minus drone count) worth of hydralisks, <a> click on the map, and then when they all fall due to horrid micro and choice of unit mix, they qq all over tl.net that there's an imba. You just have to make good surrounds, harrass, and so forth. For what it's worth, I do rather well against other Zerg and Terran, it's Protoss that I have issues with, oddly enough. But mutas rape terran air, they're super fast for map control, and brood lords and ultralisks take out terran mech very efficiently, and infestor fungal growth micro with bling bombing and roach/hydra/zergling support have worked just fine for me. My big issue is the wargate tech of toss, and I just seem to be lacking in my game there, but you don't see me crying imba...
Very nice link there, thank you. It appears there are less Zerg, but 20% is nothing too small.
NP. I tried finding matchup stats (I think I remember reading someone saying Blizz released them and TvZ was like a 80% win) but couldn't.
On July 29 2010 05:06 DuncanIdaho wrote: I'll have you know that I teach statistics at a Big 12 University to undergraduates, while attending grad school there, majoring in, oh, statistics, so perhaps I am in my realm of expertise and have the right to speak about it (the major is quantitative psychology to be exact).
Careful where you're pointing that tail. You're head's getting platykurtic.
On July 29 2010 05:06 DuncanIdaho wrote: For what it's worth, I do rather well against other Zerg and Terran, it's Protoss that I have issues with, oddly enough.
Same.
As to your other points: you're right. Players are getting better and better at dealing with Terran mech. It'll all work out in the end. I'm optimist.
Zerg has many mechanics that still have not been used to their fullest
Agree with that statement, and it goes for the other 2 races aswell. The game has been out for 1 day and we've yet to see loads of units be used to their fullest potential.
Zerg has many mechanics that still have not been used to their fullest
Agree with that statement, and it goes for the other 2 races aswell. The game has been out for 1 day and we've yet to see loads of units be used to their fullest potential.
Well the game is out for 1 day but beta has been played for 4 months, With what you wrote, the other 2 races having underused mechanics as well, this means that nobody can say wether a race is weak/strong. Many things have been said about starcraft1 units/strategies, and then were proven false. Learn from history and don't repeat it.
On July 29 2010 01:32 DanielD wrote: Alright, well, I came back to this topic, and I have to say: I AM NOT DISAPPOINTED!!
I am throughly convinced now by the brilliant posts on here that the full breadth of strategies and tactics that can be utilized by all the races have been worked out, and obviously Zerg is underpowered.
~6 months of beta play-time and 1 and 1/2 day of retail release is clearly long enough to determine everything about this game, I mean, pro BW wasn't having 1-base play for more than a week, right?
annoying post... so we cant discuss balance until sc2 is ten years old? dont you think people in scbw discussed balance ? >.< how do you think the game got balanced?
duuuerp think before post please
There is a big difference between discussing balance and complaining about imba tanks. There is also a big difference between glaring imbalances and stuff that may or may not be meta-game related, and I think that distinction is pretty clear.
But my post is more related to the repetitiveness of the balance "discussion" (I use that term very loosely), in that it isn't saying anything new and isn't helpful to people interested in finding a solution since it's mostly people agreeing with how much it sucks for Zerg. Obviously not everyone, but most.
On July 29 2010 01:32 DanielD wrote: Alright, well, I came back to this topic, and I have to say: I AM NOT DISAPPOINTED!!
I am throughly convinced now by the brilliant posts on here that the full breadth of strategies and tactics that can be utilized by all the races have been worked out, and obviously Zerg is underpowered.
~6 months of beta play-time and 1 and 1/2 day of retail release is clearly long enough to determine everything about this game, I mean, pro BW wasn't having 1-base play for more than a week, right?
Who said all is worked out and we know everything about the game (except you)?
Your argument is "There might be tactics out there that noone discovered, thus dont do balance changes"? If I didnt understand correctly, then please explain.
Then why do Blizzard do balance patches at all when there is undiscovered tactics that *might* beat what is thought as unbalanced? For example Blizzard nerfed roaches, but they should not have done that because we have not discovered all the tactics, according to your logic..
Actually, yes. I would much prefer waiting for balance changes and dealing with potentially unfair things than have Blizzard patch things ASAP before really exploring all of the possible tactics/solutions to a certain issue. I see people being way too quick to complain and ask for nerfs/buffs rather than trying to find in-game solutions.
But anyways, I apologize for my anti-nerd rage, nerd-rage, but I've made posts in several topics refuting those on here complaining about terran mech and bio balls and how supposedly Zerg have nothing, that we should be able to blindly sit at our base, queue up 200 food (minus drone count) worth of hydralisks, <a> click on the map, and then when they all fall due to horrid micro and choice of unit mix, they qq all over tl.net that there's an imba. You just have to make good surrounds, harrass, and so forth. For what it's worth, I do rather well against other Zerg and Terran, it's Protoss that I have issues with, oddly enough. But mutas rape terran air, they're super fast for map control, and brood lords and ultralisks take out terran mech very efficiently, and infestor fungal growth micro with bling bombing and roach/hydra/zergling support have worked just fine for me. My big issue is the wargate tech of toss, and I just seem to be lacking in my game there, but you don't see me crying imba...
Again, you're simply not paying attention. People claiming imbalance because of KOTB are in the far minority, and people saying Zerg can't compete with Terran mech end game with BL/Ultra are ALSO in the minority. The issue people are having is in the period before they can get tier 3 units out because it's so time and resource intensive to get there. Once Zerg gets to tier 3 they have a far more viable solution.
The excuse that all Zerg players are just subpar and only a-move is tiring. Did we all miss the memo that only clueless players are allowed to play Zerg and only good players play Terran? You keep focusing on issues that the majority of people are not complaining about and acting like they're Zerg's primary concern. It's the 8-15 minute mark that is so difficult and Terran mech centers around units that hard counter every zerg unit before tier 3.
Regardless, we'll see what tactics and balance comes in the next couple weeks/months and people will figure it out. Balance is really good right now, and with a couple minor tweaks I'm sure everything will be sitting really well.
Im not the best player in the world but now that i switch to full time zerg loosing from 1 base terran pushes because of the imba siege tank ai isnt the best u know - when i have 3 bases but im unable to break the defence - tester vs tlo or idra vs defending tlo any1 ?
Yea i can do drops if he hasnt got many marines or thors or hes total noob to counter it i can do more harass blah blah.
point is for a zerg player to win vs a toss or vs a terran needs to be twice as good esp under pro categories which 99% of us are.
and no balance isnt that good , every1 knows how imba terran are compare to other 2 races and zerg are in the bottom atm cause they need better players to master and even then theyr not on par.
Terms of mechanics only zerg use this outtade upgrade hatchery thing wheras the other 2 races can build any unit asap and try different builds.
Zerg cannot do a ultra or broodlord rush its just aint happening but terran can do thor rush.
also their top tier units dont justify their worth - apart maybe broodlords - due to the ai mess but is so hard to build them esp when u get constantly harass from a toss or a terran player.
I can go on and on like this but stats will show that terran and toss are like easy 90% of the fights i almost never see a zerg player in europe and thats for a good reason.
REM.ca, thanks for the warning, I'll be careful not skew my distributions and I'll be sure to keep the central tendency more leptokurtic
And Disp,
I see now, what you're homing in upon. So you're not concerned about the other arguments about why Zerg are imba, such as KOTB, or end-game competition, but the argument about hard counters in the mid-game. Well, I apologize for not paying attention to that, but there's a reason for my selective hearing, since I no longer believe in the existence of counters. I refer you to watch this video, which I will admit, I was guilty of being one of the few requesting it of Trebis:
However, pretending that there were such a thing as a "hard counter" (What makes it hard, that it's <a> + map-click w/o micro needed?) , I'd say a decent counter to midgame stuff in the 8-15 min period, while teching to "the only thing that works, b-lords and ultras" would be to keep expanding and harrassing terran everytime their army leaves their base. I find that blings are great at taking out bio balls, roaches with burrow tech are great at seige (or of course, mutas), and if all else fails, put blings burrowed (with autocast unburrow, perhaps) in advance, or hiding in grass near seige tank prefered locations. And if the terran sends hellions, roaches are great. And of course for tanks, mutas are always top notch. Thors are really the only threat to mutas (which fall to mass roaches quite well, about 5 roaches/thor usually works for me, though if they reach a critical mass of several thors, hopefully you can tech to b-lords/ultras ((now immune to stun from thor cannon! )) by then), other than bio balls, which are dispatched by a big zerg mix of the roach/bling/zergling, and hydralisks especially with range upgrade, are always nice if you can tech to it. Infestors (protect them by burrowing, and remember you can spam infested terrans while staying burrowed) with fungal growth also help deal with bio balls by rooting them in place for blings and surrounds, or for retreats. Notice all of these are mostly accessible early onward, none of which require hive tech, just lair plus their building, save for roaches, lings and blings.
Again, remember zerg are great at tech switching, but just have eyes around and see what's coming. Lings are great scouts, and so are olords/seers. And pump out about 2-3 queens at every hatch just to be safe, and spread the creep as well. And remember, you don't have to face them head on, flank them, base trade, harrass, out econ while teching. Not that you can't face them head on... But people seem to have trouble and cry imba apparently...
And for what it's worth, spawning pool=65sec,lair-upgrade=80,infestor=50(meanwhile, start spire=100, but it will finish during hive), hive=100,gspire=100. 65+80+50+100+100=395seconds. That's 6min 36 seconds, not counting drone time to getup to afford stuff, though once you slap down a spawning pool you should be able to time things such that you can get upgrades as soon as the previous is done being made. So, this 8-15minutes which Zerg suck, until they have t3? Bah, good scouting and preparation shouldn't let that period be long.
So, in short, I stick to my case, Zerg are not imba. They're highly mobile, great at pumping out massive armies on short notice, and awesome at map takeovers. They're not so great at 1 on 1 unit fighting (Hello, they're a swarm race, safety in numbers!), their scouting is arguably the worst of the 3 races, but otherwise a great race and equivalent in gamability/winability. And don't forget, everything can "cloak", perhaps not run, but burrow is definitely a staple meant to be abused.
After reading about 1 million zerg is underpowered whine threads (which may or may not be valid) which complain about the same things, here are a few things to think about.
1)Lack of a zerg wall-off is a huge issue: Not only is this immediately obvious, that hellions force zerg into a certain style of play (defensive until they can get up the correct counters). But for a much deeper reason.
Many of the problems that zerg has to deal with stem from the absurd amount of tech that terran are able to get in the current MU. Absurdly quick hellions, fast siege tanks, thor's and drops etc. When looking at zerg's tech tree, there are plenty of options for harassment as well, nydus, muta, quick B-lords, drops. The problem is, zerg can never get these options in a time that will allow them to be effective. They are always late teching. Why? Because they are forced to build their tech tree around stopping hellions, banshees and thor drops.
The equivalent of the barracks with fast gas, directly into factory, would be a spawning pool with fast gas into lair. This build can never be pulled off because zergling speed is required to defend against hellions. And insanely early hellions are a guarantee due to the wall off eliminating early zergling pressure. This is where the matchup is imbalanced. Due to the wall-off trumping any early zerg pressure, the terran is able to get a harassment tech lead, and always keep it due to forcing the zerg to counter it.
2) Secondly, I feel that there is a strategy that all zerg are sorely missing out on, and that is using the Overseer's corrupt ability. Terran have a very hard time tech switching, because in order to do so effectively they must have alot of production buildings. In order to be able to tech switch quickly to any of the 3 branches, that means they need alot of ALL three types of building. Zerg on the other hand can plop down one building, and tech switch hard.
It is very rare to see terran have more than 3 factories or starports when going a balanced build. Thus, zerg should upon getting to lair, morph 3 overseer's, scout the terran's army comp, then counter while corrupting the terrans buildings which counter the zergs new comp. For instance: if terran is going light on thors (1 or 2 in the mid-game). Zerg goes heavy heavy muta:12+ and corrupts the factories. Take out the thors, and now the terran army is screwed. Because zerg is going mostly all muta, a decent strategy for terran would be to counter into the zerg's main because he has not many ground units, but this is where the terran ball's immobility hits hard.
I'm sure these idea's are a little sketchy around the outsides due to lack of personal play time recently, but they are definitely something to consider.
I played roughly 300 Games as Zerg in Beta and i win about 50% of my Games (more in Mirror and vs Protoss and less in vs Terran).
Now, i switched to Protoss (had perhabs 10 Games in Beta) and won my last 12 Games and it was easy.
Zergs problem is, that they don't have an easymode-uber-Unit like Voidray, Tank, Banshee, DT and all that stuff. They just have standard Units with no big negative aspects, but also no big strenghts or surprise effects.
Every opponent just plays a standard Game VS Zerg and you have very few options to really throw the opponent off his game plan.
@emothugn I've actually seen quite a lot of corruption use lately so that is coming.
As a general statement, it bugs me when people read imbalance as over- or underpowered. A match-up can be imbalanced and still have an equal winning percentage. Lets say blizzard would have made zerg with 10 useless units and 1 uber good one that is the only one people make. Thanks to that 1 uberunit, zerg are able to win about 50 % games against an equal skilled opponent. Is that a balanced game? Of course not. The same applies in the current ZvT imo. It's not that terran is necessarily overpowered rather than there is an imbalanced in how the match-up plays out during the game, especially in mid-game. How to fix it is harder though. That's my two cents anyway.
Yep, good points emothugn. I agree terran can be tough, but I usually go early air with roaches in the interim (and maybe speedlings,banelings, depending on terrans composition), and Zerg air seem to be great at beating Terran so far, as I'm in the gold league. Perhaps Terrans get better at being "unbeatable" at higher levels, but for now I do just fine. It's early proxying Protoss players I'm having the biggest issues with at the moment. But yeah, Zerg have yet to make me throw the game at the wall and stomp it to pieces.
I just feel that terran mech is too strong, and that making NP last 12 seconds makes it even harder to deal with tanks. I Think they need to switch NP back to unlimited so the thors and tanks wont kill your army off even if you win the scrimmage with only a few units left.
I mean, NP will just become useless in comparison to FG and IT if left at 12 seconds
On July 30 2010 06:38 Terrifyer wrote: I just feel that terran mech is too strong, and that making NP last 12 seconds makes it even harder to deal with tanks. I Think they need to switch NP back to unlimited so the thors and tanks wont kill your army off even if you win the scrimmage with only a few units left.
I mean, NP will just become useless in comparison to FG and IT if left at 12 seconds
I honestly thought that was a bug. Creep Tumor has been changed back to 15 Seconds and i hoped NP would last forever again too.
I mean, it's really hard to use NP anyway.. but if you manage to get it off, you should be able to keep the Unit... you could still kill the Infestor to get it back.
I think you've captured the three main strengths of the Zerg. A lot of it is certainly under-used in the <diamond leagues. Take for instance tech switching. If you are Zerg, e.g. facing Terran, just putting down a spire can be scary for the Terran. The mere threat that you can produce a bunch of mutas at any point means I as a Terran have to build new production facilities, invest in AA, etc and you don't have to get a single mutalisk.
I also see way to many players making the mistake of sticking with the same kinds of units, e.g. only getting a roach warren or a hydralisk den, why would you ever not get both? Its not a huge investment. Also, many are sticking with lower-tier units for way to long, maybe its just tempting to just mass same kinds of units.
On July 30 2010 10:40 jax1492 wrote: I read this before the launch and was not sold ... after launch im now a zerg player ... its amazing how good they actually are.
Everything is relative.
Don't know if this is some kind of "Idra effect" but has everyone rerolled zerg? Since the launch it feels like I have been playing a whole lot more ZvsZ than during the beta. Maybe it's only because all zerg players are as bad as I and play in the middle segment.
Something else worth mentioning is that I haven't faced any thor+tank combo since the release?
On July 31 2010 18:10 Endymion wrote: Tons of Z at ~500 ELO diamond, all I get is ZvZ =/ seems like a deficit of P to me.
12 zergs in top 50 everybody is hallucinating close to same # of zergs (if not fewer than) as other races from what I can tell
on topic: I actually think zvp is Z favored and ZvT is balanced in the far distant positions on LT/metalopolis/blistering sands
I just think zvt is fucking hard as fuck on steppes/kulas/close positions on metalopolis/LT
off topic - I still don't know how raelcun's threads get so much pub whether hes right or not is beside the point hes like a couch-based expert, spectating/casting far more games than he plays
EPT
, zerg has yet to be used at its full potential. Shout out to IdrA he has the best unit control as a zerg player! (I said it)
. Ya I agree with almost all that you said.
)) by then), other than bio balls, which are dispatched by a big zerg mix of the roach/bling/zergling, and hydralisks especially with range upgrade, are always nice if you can tech to it. Infestors (protect them by burrowing, and remember you can spam infested terrans while staying burrowed) with fungal growth also help deal with bio balls by rooting them in place for blings and surrounds, or for retreats. Notice all of these are mostly accessible early onward, none of which require hive tech, just lair plus their building, save for roaches, lings and blings.
