|
United States47024 Posts
On August 03 2010 09:26 kNyTTyM wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2010 08:38 TheYango wrote:
Don't see why there's all this hubbub.
Haven't Artosis and Idra said on multiple occasions that making tanks capable of overkill again would effectively handle most, if not all the imbalance issues with Terran? Isn't the only unit cited by Tester in his "Terran is overpowered" interview the Siege Tank?
The tank overkill is supposed to fix late game mech. Terran still has a ridiculous amount of early game options that can outright kill zerg. Judging from your icon you played Terran in brood war. It is like playing against a cheesy PvT player. Imagine scouts had the strength of a guardian and could cloak (banshee) You are unable to surround your base in turrets to prevent reaver drops and the reaver itself moves faster then almost all your units (preigniter hellion drops) You don't have a tactical defense unit like the siege tank so you must rely on bunkers. His dragoons can rape your bunkers in 2:1 ratios (marauder:spines) Protoss can build corsairs that kill your supply depots. (vikings) The list goes on and on.
While this is certainly an interesting comparison, it's worth noting that none of the changes in the OP addresses any of these. And I'll swallow my nerdrage and say that despite how irritating and unforgiving playing early game TvP is in BW, for higher level play it's balanced.
On August 03 2010 09:26 kNyTTyM wrote:
Also tester did mention siege tanks as a joke unit but he also said terran played properly can't lose. He didn't actually say whether the tank was the only cause so we can only speculate.
I'd rather not base potential balance changes on speculation. Until there's more data/high-level opinion backing up the position that TvP needs the fix, I'd much prefer sticking to changes that are isolated primarily to TvZ.
|
On August 03 2010 09:26 kNyTTyM wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2010 08:38 TheYango wrote:
Don't see why there's all this hubbub.
Haven't Artosis and Idra said on multiple occasions that making tanks capable of overkill again would effectively handle most, if not all the imbalance issues with Terran? Isn't the only unit cited by Tester in his "Terran is overpowered" interview the Siege Tank?
The tank overkill is supposed to fix late game mech. Terran still has a ridiculous amount of early game options that can outright kill zerg. Judging from your icon you played Terran in brood war. It is like playing against a cheesy PvT player. Imagine scouts had the strength of a guardian and could cloak (banshee) You are unable to surround your base in turrets to prevent reaver drops and the reaver itself moves faster then almost all your units (preigniter hellion drops) You don't have a tactical defense unit like the siege tank so you must rely on bunkers. His dragoons can rape your bunkers in 2:1 ratios (marauder:spines) Protoss can build corsairs that kill your supply depots. (vikings) The list goes on and on. Also tester did mention siege tanks as a joke unit but he also said terran played properly can't lose. He didn't actually say whether the tank was the only cause so we can only speculate.
as long as we're grasping at references to BW. what about 2port wraith? 2 rax? 3rax sunk break? mnm drop? vulture runby? early tank pushes? FE? how on earth did zerg deal with all that in BW? this doesn't sound like terran is clearly imbalanced it sounds more like we haven't figured out standard openings yet that work well with what terran can throw at us.
if you know a build is coming and you can stop it it isn't imbalanced. you simply have to be more vigilant with scouting or take more than 2weeks to develop a game sense to figure out X building timing means X opening or something similar. i can see if the problem persists there may be cause for alarm but i think it is too early to be calling it that now.
speaking of BW TvP. lots of people raged about it cause it sucked but there was NEVER a serious balance discussion about it. it was mostly a way to vent / poke fun of protoss players.
|
The true problem with Terran is the tech lab. The abillity to tech up so incredibly quick and get such lethal units with incredible diversity (tanks, banshees,reapers,marauders) while zerg is stuck with the same units and cannot react quickly enough to compete with the terran in the early-mid game. It's so broken and it's unbelievable that we havn't complained enough about this
|
how is it in korea? last time i heard zergs were dominant
most of OP's idea are hilariously bad but the idea itself of nerfing terran isnt nescasarily bad. if i was in the balance crew id definetly be looking alot at the terran match ups right now.
id love if they made terran harder to play, not necessarily nerfing the units but just made them harder to play. it feels like u need to put in more hours in the practice if u wanna stay on the same level as a terran if ur a toss, reverse positions from bw. i have no proof or anything but this is just my opinion )
lalush ever since sc2 came uve been way too sucked up in balance instead of becoming a better player, im sure if u put in more hours and try new things u will feel the mus to be more fair. there r many unknown zergs who r practicing hard and doing better against the top terrans then the current best zergs because they focus at winning tours and debating balance on the forum^^
maybe i sound like a hypocrite. ok, im most definetly a hypocrite because when terran was very weak i talked so much about balance and even stopped practice for a month so im not any better than u. but to be frank after my speaches my words became truth and the things i wanted blizzard also patched but right now u all zergs have been complaining but nothing is happening. ur issues with the mu is maybe not as apperent as they were when zerg was too strong, i dont know. but if u dont see a balance change soon, please just note that blizzard is trying their best to balance the game and they dont patch up balance because they need more convincing. they dont think u r playing smart enough because if u did what blizzard wanted u to do and it still didnt make u win then blizzard would patch it immediately , like they did with terran
ive basically won all my games without the support of heavy medivac healing, lalush your suggestions are not accurate, you dont know what the issue is with the match up, i dont expect u to know it either from any single player but to make solo random suggestions because u feel the entire mu is overall favorable to terran is not very productive. we can only go as far as its imbalanced, in the early beta we could say roach was the problem, marine was the problem, but now all we can say the match up is not balanced or the maps. dont make actual balance suggestions because nobody here on the forum will agree the mu would be alot better if lower supply dragged 10 energy from my orbital command. its up to blizzard to figure out the issue, ur job is just to use the units u have and say what u feel is imba, not to say what is to be changed. dont make a fool of yourself ^^
|
I think the main problem are the maps. Larger and more open maps will balance out the matchup.
I think you're trying too hard to find exact flaws when its a more simple issue like map imbalance.
|
@Supply Depots
BS, so drops and harass are more effective? By the time you're dropping, terran would always have a natural, therefore lifting and dropping should already be researched. And how is my scouting SCV supposed to back
@Viking Range Nerf
Really dude? Mutalisks own vikings if its just Muta vs Viking
@Marauder Nerf
Blink and concussive shells have a HUGE difference, why would you even compare that. Concussive shells may also sometimes be helpful in the situation of a defensive background, you're acting as if people only use C. Shells while chasing down retreating units.
|
Okay all...Morrow has spoken. Is that good enough for some of you?
|
On August 03 2010 04:04 Zoltan wrote:
Medics / medivacs have always been OP. Terran is the only race that does not have any natural regen at all, so you would expect their heal bus to actually have some effect on combat. Lowering the heal per second would really make the MMM strategy pretty useless.
So you say they are OP and yet you're aggainst any change? Talk about being biased. Anyway, shields regen are nifty, zerg regen is pretty small, and neither does any significant difference in a battle, while the medics does a huge difference in and outside a battle. I'll trade any zerg HP regen or shield regens for the medivacs.
And yes MMM would be useless because medivacs wouldn't exist, so it would be only MM.
|
On August 03 2010 09:48 MorroW wrote:
how is it in korea? last time i heard zergs were dominant
most of OP's idea are hilariously bad but the idea itself of nerfing terran isnt nescasarily bad. if i was in the balance crew id definetly be looking alot at the terran match ups right now.
id love if they made terran harder to play, not necessarily nerfing the units but just made them harder to play
I know these statistics doesn't say that much but we could at least draw the conclusion that zerg doesn't dominate Korea at the moment.
Written by Arcalious in this thread:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=140559
Data for the top 10, 1K and 5K
Count=100
Top=100 Terran=42 Zerg=25 Protoss=31 Random=2
US=36 Terran=15 Zerg=9 Protoss=11 Random=1
EU=32 Terran=14 Zerg=7 Protoss=11 Random=0
KR=32 Terran=13 Zerg=9 Protoss=9 Random=1
Count=1000
Top=1000 Terran=300 Zerg=240 Protoss=401 Random=59
US=406 Terran=129 Zerg=87 Protoss=162 Random=28
EU=419 Terran=119 Zerg=114 Protoss=165 Random=21
KR=175 Terran=52 Zerg=39 Protoss=74 Random=10
Count=5000
Top=5000 Terran=1452 Zerg=1253 Protoss=1885 Random=410
US=2148 Terran=625 Zerg=551 Protoss=769 Random=203
EU=2003 Terran=553 Zerg=537 Protoss=763 Random=150
KR=849 Terran=274 Zerg=165 Protoss=353 Random=57
Worth mentioning is that this doesn't say anything about how the matchups does against each other. Most matchups are probably closer to 50/50 than most people think.
|
On August 03 2010 09:48 MorroW wrote:
how is it in korea? last time i heard zergs were dominant
most of OP's idea are hilariously bad but the idea itself of nerfing terran isnt nescasarily bad. if i was in the balance crew id definetly be looking alot at the terran match ups right now.
id love if they made terran harder to play, not necessarily nerfing the units but just made them harder to play. it feels like u need to put in more hours in the practice if u wanna stay on the same level as a terran if ur a toss, reverse positions from bw. i have no proof or anything but this is just my opinion )
lalush ever since sc2 came uve been way too sucked up in balance instead of becoming a better player, im sure if u put in more hours and try new things u will feel the mus to be more fair. there r many unknown zergs who r practicing hard and doing better against the top terrans then the current best zergs because they focus at winning tours and debating balance on the forum^^
maybe i sound like a hypocrite. ok, im most definetly a hypocrite because when terran was very weak i talked so much about balance and even stopped practice for a month so im not any better than u. but to be frank after my speaches my words became truth and the things i wanted blizzard also patched but right now u all zergs have been complaining but nothing is happening. ur issues with the mu is maybe not as apperent as they were when terran was too strong, i dont know. but if u dont see a balance change soon, please just note that blizzard is trying their best to balance the game and they dont patch up balance because they need more convincing. they dont think u r playing smart enough because if u did what blizzard wanted u to do and it still didnt make u win then blizzard would patch it immediately , like they did with terran
Well the MULE change is specifically aimed at making terran harder to play. As is the supply depot change.
In that light I don't really understand what it is that you think is hilariously bad. To my understanding it seems to accomplish what you want?
I didn't want to make this into a "nerf" thread, but rather into a "make terran harder to play" thread.
|
@Batch I could also nulify your last statement by saying that "Matchups are probably further from 50/50 than most people think." Statements like these are worthless without any kind of justification.
|
unless you have 33% of each race statistics like this will not be accurate at all ^^ we can all agree most players are terran so logically most top players are terran as well
|
How is it that most players are terran?
Count=5000
Top=5000 Terran=1452 Zerg=1253 Protoss=1885 Random=410
1st Protoss
-433
2nd Terran
-199
3rd Zerg
Protoss 38%
Terran 29%
Zerg 25%
Random 8%
Then suddenly on the top 100
Terran 42%
Protoss 31%
Zerg 25%
Random 2%
I don't understand why some people have trouble with the words "imbalance" and "overpowered" and start throwing bits as if everyone that says the game is imbalanced are kids who lost games and came to complain to the forums because they don't have the skills to beat "x" combo of units / strategy. Use your brains for once. See that it's several times more likely that the matchups are imbalanced than not, and the people saying the game is already balanced are the ones that should be laughed at and not the other way around.
|
Morrow and mahnini hit it on the nail! People are so enveloped in this IMBA argument they fail to smell the shit in front of their nose. I am betting most of these people haven't even tried the baneling bomb strategy against a mech army. Artosis made mech look pitiful, and I don't understand why this hasn't caught on. Maybe it's because it involves much more than a 1a in to the opponent, which is quite sad. So you have to micro a little bit more to win, SO WHAT, that's the point of mech, it's like a movable fortress, how could you possibly expect that to be easy to break with an all in attack head on? Plus I am sure there are far more ways to deal with a Terran opponent, but some people will be stubborn and just simply do the same repetitive builds until some pro comes up with a new one to copy and paste in to their arsenal.
And yes, if we look back to BroodWar, mech was almost void versus Zerg until late game when some tanks were used as support. They were useless because of mobility and Zerg's got even more than before!! The creep advantages are not used to their full potential at all, if Zergs are more persistent with this and have a huge creep highway around the map when the turtling Terran finally pushes out you can flank or even counter attack, maybe even with a nydus in their base to knock out the factories. I think of these things and I don't even play Zerg, I can only imagine if I did how much stuff I would think of instead of QQ about IMBA every time I got out played.
Anyway, I don't even mech, I like the Bio-Ball strategies better because of mobility. I also agree that right now Terran has the upper hand on their Zerg opponents but I wouldn't just blindly look at what someone else calls imbalanced and instead look at ways to deal with or counter these problems.
Now everyone, please hop off of the band wagon, it's headed for a cliff.
|
On August 03 2010 10:07 LaLuSh wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2010 09:48 MorroW wrote:
how is it in korea? last time i heard zergs were dominant
most of OP's idea are hilariously bad but the idea itself of nerfing terran isnt nescasarily bad. if i was in the balance crew id definetly be looking alot at the terran match ups right now.
id love if they made terran harder to play, not necessarily nerfing the units but just made them harder to play. it feels like u need to put in more hours in the practice if u wanna stay on the same level as a terran if ur a toss, reverse positions from bw. i have no proof or anything but this is just my opinion )
lalush ever since sc2 came uve been way too sucked up in balance instead of becoming a better player, im sure if u put in more hours and try new things u will feel the mus to be more fair. there r many unknown zergs who r practicing hard and doing better against the top terrans then the current best zergs because they focus at winning tours and debating balance on the forum^^
maybe i sound like a hypocrite. ok, im most definetly a hypocrite because when terran was very weak i talked so much about balance and even stopped practice for a month so im not any better than u. but to be frank after my speaches my words became truth and the things i wanted blizzard also patched but right now u all zergs have been complaining but nothing is happening. ur issues with the mu is maybe not as apperent as they were when terran was too strong, i dont know. but if u dont see a balance change soon, please just note that blizzard is trying their best to balance the game and they dont patch up balance because they need more convincing. they dont think u r playing smart enough because if u did what blizzard wanted u to do and it still didnt make u win then blizzard would patch it immediately , like they did with terran Well the MULE change is specifically aimed at making terran harder to play. As is the supply depot change. In that light I don't really understand what it is that you think is hilariously bad. To my understanding it seems to accomplish what you want? I didn't want to make this into a "nerf" thread, but rather into a "make terran harder to play" thread.
the part that doesnt work is that we are just 2 swedish players lalush. uve practically not gotten urself any achievements and that includes when zerg was wayyyy imba and u still said zerg was too weak then. i dont wanna bm here but i just try to paint u the picture from another perspective than from our own.
for example ur mule suggestion makes u need to drop mule less. but also the timings between a mule drop is less. so mathematically its easier to adapt to ur enemy and easier to make decisions if u can make them more often. so ur suggestion to make it harder actually makes it alot easier. if i play tvt and i got 50 energy i say. do i wanna drop this mule? if i drop it and he come with banshee i am screwed. so i wait and i wait until the time is over for banshee rush and then i am safe to drop 2 mues. this is just an example but the concept itself of making mule cost less makes terran alot more adaptable. terran would be alot easier to play when it comes to mindgame medigame adapting scouting economy harassment, pretty much every single aspect of the race except for the 5~ more apm u need per minute which doesnt matter if u ask me.
the concept behind what im talking about is like an investment, lets say an upgrade. its useless until its upgraded and then it give +1 which is huge. imagine if an upgrade cost half and gave +0.5, then everyone would be upgrading more because the window of time ur enemy can abuse ur non upgrade is smaller, and u can adapt to more timing attacks because its a lesser investment. this exact thing applies to the mule. you must wait until 50 then drop it. if u can wait less and drop it and wait less to get ur scan after dropped the mule makes it alot more comfortable because u can take smaller steps in ur bos and adaptments giving the race alot more water flow. this subject is very complicated and i hope i explained it good enough for u to understand.
ill give another example.
imagine if probe cost 100 and takes 2 psi and make 2 probe same time. then u can alwyas only say, should i make 10 12 14 gate instead of 10 11 12 13 14. see how many more options you have when your investments cost less. do you understand now?  on top of that i get less econ because my first probe come same time as my second probe, which is what, 20 seconds of mining time? the same thing is if ur mule drops earlier temporarily u will have more minerals compared to a twice cost efficient mule.
same goes to units. if i try to kill 1 big marine with twice hp is harder to kill than 2 marine with normal hp because of the time between u kill the second and first marine is time that he got half fire power
its all the same from mule energy cost to upgrade time to probe build 1 or 2 at a time, same way of math
just to read something so flawed like this makes me lose respect for all ur suggestions, to be so inaccurate for what, say a suggestion like nobody has thought about it before? blizzard think about all day what they can do for suggestions, suggestions is the easy part but to understand what it means is harder, and you clearly have no clue what the consequences would be to lower mule cost
they give tank 10 less damage in siege, and right now 4 weeks later entire tvt is turned upside down and nobody is winning with tank viking, everyone is doing different bos and everyone is clueless. talked to merz about this today.
such a small change in a mirror mu just changes the ENTIRE match up, imagine what a small change can do to a non-mirror, be careful on what ur suggestions are to balance because not even the best players on the earth would feel safe to give a suggestion right now. your making a fool out of yourself for each little sad suggestion u make, this goes to everybody. it was a different story when we had 20 pages of ppl agreeing that concussive shells need an upgrade, that wasnt sad, that was brilliant minds of teamliquid working together and it was easier to come with balance suggestions back then because the game was less balanced ^^
if i give my own personal opinion here. instead of nerfing stats here i would try to give zergs more possibility to harass and play with different styles. u can baneling bust or play a defensive macro game, i have 99% of replays on all databases to back that up. terran on the other hand can play whatever he wants and thats why i think its tough for a zerg to play zvt, because terran can just improvise and gay around and it looks brilliant while zerg must prepare for every single little dirty situation. this is the difference between being aggressive and defensive, being defensive takes twice more hours of practice ^^
The other solution is lowering the Thor air range. Reasoning? They're good enough not to lose any viability with a range of 8 or 9. 10 range is just sick and over the top.
do u even listen to urself?
if the nerf dont make them lose any viability then why even make the nerf in the first place. "hey terran is too strong, lets give thor less range because they have long range, its not like its gonna matter anyway lolol"
|
On August 03 2010 10:12 ckw wrote:Morrow and mahnini hit it on the nail! People are so enveloped in this IMBA argument they fail to smell the shit in front of their nose. I am betting most of these people haven't even tried the baneling bomb strategy against a mech army. Artosis made mech look pitiful, and I don't understand why this hasn't caught on. Maybe it's because it involves much more than a 1a in to the opponent, which is quite sad. So you have to micro a little bit more to win, SO WHAT, that's the point of mech, it's like a movable fortress, how could you possibly expect that to be easy to break with an all in attack head on? Plus I am sure there are far more ways to deal with a Terran opponent, but some people will be stubborn and just simply do the same repetitive builds until some pro comes up with a new one to copy and paste in to their arsenal. And yes, if we look back to BroodWar, mech was almost void versus Zerg until late game when some tanks were used as support. They were useless because of mobility and Zerg's got even more than before!! The creep advantages are not used to their full potential at all, if Zergs are more persistent with this and have a huge creep highway around the map when the turtling Terran finally pushes out you can flank or even counter attack, maybe even with a nydus in their base to knock out the factories. I think of these things and I don't even play Zerg, I can only imagine if I did how much stuff I would think of instead of QQ about IMBA every time I got out played. Anyway, I don't even mech, I like the Bio-Ball strategies better because of mobility. I also agree that right now Terran has the upper hand on their Zerg opponents but I wouldn't just blindly look at what someone else calls imbalanced and instead look at ways to deal with or counter these problems. Now everyone, please hop off of the band wagon, it's headed for a cliff. Show nested quote +On August 03 2010 10:10 Apolo wrote:
How is it that most players are terran?
Count=5000
Top=5000 Terran=1452 Zerg=1253 Protoss=1885 Random=410
1st Protoss
+433
2nd Terran
+199
3rd Zerg Wow, think about it dude, the campaign was a Terran one so every newb and their mother plays what was available when they were learning. That will change after a few months.
Seriously. I'm sorry but so far there are only a couple of Z players that do anything but T1/T2 1a strats. There's no 'imba' until they bother to use some higher tier units and things like baneling bombs. It's pathetic seeing roach/hydra 1a failing against in this case a tank line and then bad players complaining about it.
|
Korean top 10 has five zergs currently. The ladder is pretty evenly divided up in the top 50, but it becomes more P and T favored later (more P favored).
|
On August 03 2010 10:12 ckw wrote:
And yes, if we look back to BroodWar, mech was almost void versus Zerg until late game when some tanks were used as support. They were useless because of mobility and Zerg's got even more than before!! The creep advantages are not used to their full potential at all, if Zergs are more persistent with this and have a huge creep highway around the map when the turtling Terran finally pushes out you can flank or even counter attack, maybe even with a nydus in their base to knock out the factories. I think of these things and I don't even play Zerg, I can only imagine if I did how much stuff I would think of instead of QQ about IMBA every time I got out played.
While this is true, it was partially a function of the BW map pool. As pointed out many times by various posters, the TvZ mech problems are really exacerbated by the official maps which ALL feature extremely narrow chokes and cliffs for high ground abuse. These heavily favour Terran.
I think the slow but powerful mech vs fast but fragile zerg dynamic is nice. The current map pool just doesn't let that play out.
|
I played Zerg in the beta but switched to Terran for retail (for the obvious reasons).
I think Lalush's solution is completely wrong. Instead of nerfing Terran, Zerg should be buffed. Or, to be more precise, Zerg needs more development, needs more options.
The big problem with the Zerg is that Blizzard designed the race to 'feel swarmy'. But that is not what the Zerg is about at all. Blizzard's take on the Zerg is for their units to be fast and weak, except Zerg needs to make a gazillion of them in order to get the job done. The problem is that the unit count is locked at 200. A Zerg at 200 food versus a Terran at 200 food is game over for the Zerg. (Sure, the Zerg can throw armies at the Terran and rebuilt quick, but the Terran [and Protoss] can rebuild almost as quickly. Army creation in games is bottlenecked by resources, not production facilities.)
Also, since all of Terran units are ranged, they pack a huge amount of damage when concentrated in large numbers. Since the majority of all Zerg units are melee or short range, Zerg cannot get close most of the time.
The problem goes way beyond Zerg imbalance but is about Zerg not being a fun race to play. I think Blizzard got the definition of 'Zerg' wrong which is why the race feels so off with the units. Let me demonstrate how undefined the Zerg are with the illustration of anti-air units.
The Terran Viking is a fun unit. It can shoot missiles at air units. But it can also transform and land to do ground damage. The Vikings are fun to harass with and fun to place on ledges. I can play with this unit all day.
The Protoss Phoenix is also a fun unit. It can 'kite' and shoot at air units while moving. It also has the graviton beam which can lift units from the ground for air units to shoot at. I can play with this unit all day as well.
And now we have the Corrupter. Aside from its normal attack, it can 'corrupt' so units can take more damage. I hate this unit. It is not fun to play with at all. It looks stupid. It looks like an octopus that got ran over by a truck. Blizzard says it feels 'swarmy'. Apparently, 'swarmy' to Blizzard means uninteresting and bland units.
The Zerg units are not that 'fun' to play with. Ultralisks might be 'better' than their early beta days, but they still are not fun. Giant melee units do not work well in a game where a hundred ranged units can concentrate and kill it with ease. And what can you do with the Ultralisk aside attack-move? Frenzy? Get real.
Look at the hydralisk. Extremely useful unit. However, it is boring as watching paint. All the hydralisk can do is shoot. And... it can burrow! Dull. Boring. Stalkers with their blink are very fun. Infantry with their stims are very fun. But Zerg get 'burrow'. Yawn.
Roaches also are not fun. They are just armored hydralisks who cannot attack air. They can heal while burrowed which is something, I guess. The burrow move is silly since it is soooo slow while Terran has cloaked banshees and ghosts while Protoss have Dark Templars (and a mothership that can cloak everything).
The Zergling is fun... at first. But the zergling isn't too useful later game. The increased attack speed isn't worth it. All the range weapons take out zerglings before they approach.
The Zerg units Blizzard did a good job with would be the vomiting Overlords (more useful) (but are not a combat unit), the Overseer (useful and fun) (but also is not a combat unit), the Queen (very nice unique unit, but it is more economic unit than a combat unit), the Infestor (until the neural parasite nerf), and the Brood Lord (cool unit, but WAY too lategame to see typical use). Oh, and larva. Blizzard did a spectacular job on the larva. Yay Larva. (Banelings are just the Infested Terrans revisisted, a Starcraft 1 unit).
But Zerg is just blah. When playing Zerg, I always felt on edge. I never felt I had many options (because, as Zerg, you don't). All my games felt very 'samey'.
The basic skeleton of the Zerg is OK (though I wish the spawn larva mechanic was a little easier especially once you have like five bases). The solution I want is the Zerg to be fleshed out more. And the way to do this is to make the individual units more fun. This 'swarm' nonsense is making the entire race feel so underdeveloped.
Why does Blizzard's definition of 'swarmy' mean the units must be not fun to play with? This does not make sense to me.
An example of making a unit more interesting would be to do something like giving the ultralisk the ability to make a shockwave (with their gigantic stomp). This would make the unit way more interesting, tons more fun to micro with as frenzy still keeps ultralisk in the 'attack move' philosophy. Another example would be to make the corruptor as much fun to play with as the Viking and Phoenix (why not ensnare enemy air units with its tentacles, to hold them?).
And why can't Zerg use cliffs like Terran and Protoss? That, alone, makes many maps imbalanced to Zerg.
I disagree with Lalush's idea of 'nerfing'. I think it is better to develop the Zerg more so the Zerg is as fun race to play as the Protoss and Terran.
|
On August 03 2010 10:07 Apolo wrote:
@Batch I could also nulify your last statement by saying that "Matchups are probably further from 50/50 than most people think." Statements like these are worthless without any kind of justification.
The reason I wrote that is because people often only see the potential of other races when they loses and rarely the potential of their own race. I'm sure there are balance issues in the game but not as many as one can assume by looking at all nerf threads on TL and the official forum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
