|
On August 06 2010 18:37 IdrA wrote:
stupid people will argue that they arent unskilled just because they were unknown (and thats not my argument, theyre unskilled because theyre bad, but you people dont seem to understand that), but if thats the case how come theres almost no one previously unknown having similar success with z/p? there are a few, like huk, and while hes not particularly good hes shown consistent results across multiple patches. unlike the tens of terrans who've popped up since the beginning of phase 2.
IdrA basically explained the current situation perfectly. Also, due to a bunch of bad Terrans appearing, I think IdrA is showing a little...very tiny piece of respect for Huk. *plays fanfare*
|
On August 06 2010 18:37 IdrA wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 01:51 koppik wrote:On August 05 2010 01:35 partysnatcher wrote:According to IdrA above, Korean Zerg "domination" is a false rumour? They were dominating at the end of phase 1, and there have only been about 2 and a half weeks of play time since then, in which we've had really just one big tournament (in which Zerg -did not- win. But Zergs came in second and third). The current Korean top 10 ladder has had between 3-6 Zergs in the top ten since the start, with 5 currently. They're no longer "dominating", but they're doing at least as well as Terran. Honestly, I think it feels like Protoss is the "weak race" from the recent plays. A protoss hasn't done well in an Asian/Korean tournament since like Tester in the PlayXP. Well, I guess you can also count Tester and Anypro in the Prime vs. oGs Star2gether, but that's a clan war. i really wish people would stop making claims like that when they arent actually involved in the korean scene. ya zerg is reasonably well represented, but the zergs are people like me, junwi, cool, check whereas the terrans are 'ogsgon' 'simpsonprime' 'ogstop'. and if you watch them play or play against them they arent actually good. their macro falls apart at the drop of a hat, they dont micro beyond reaper kiting, they are unskilled nobodies winning purely on the strength of their race. were there any terran players of equivalent skill to the zerg players they would be going undefeated. as is thestc is the only pro sc1 terran taking it seriously i think, and for some reason or another he sucks. and he still won the big phase2 gom tournament. its the same situation on the us server, ya some zergs and a protoss can compete, but theyre mostly players who were already known, who are actually good at rts' and in most cases were good at sc1. and then you have random bad players, and lots of them, different ones every week, shooting up the ladder and placing in every tournament with terran. stupid people will argue that they arent unskilled just because they were unknown (and thats not my argument, theyre unskilled because theyre bad, but you people dont seem to understand that), but if thats the case how come theres almost no one previously unknown having similar success with z/p? there are a few, like huk, and while hes not particularly good hes shown consistent results across multiple patches. unlike the tens of terrans who've popped up since the beginning of phase 2. dunno how it can be any more obvious that theres something seriously wrong.
LOL here is the truth.
NOT TO MENTION THAT ZVZ IS A COMPLETE JOKE SINCE QUITE SOME TIME AGO, YET NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE!
|
And magically people disappear from the thread when the truth is clearly told.
Zerg need serious help, and I'm waiting for Blizzard to find that out.
|
On August 06 2010 20:39 Whole wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2010 18:37 IdrA wrote:
stupid people will argue that they arent unskilled just because they were unknown (and thats not my argument, theyre unskilled because theyre bad, but you people dont seem to understand that), but if thats the case how come theres almost no one previously unknown having similar success with z/p? there are a few, like huk, and while hes not particularly good hes shown consistent results across multiple patches. unlike the tens of terrans who've popped up since the beginning of phase 2. IdrA basically explained the current situation perfectly. Also, due to a bunch of bad Terrans appearing, I think IdrA is showing a little...very tiny piece of respect for Huk. *plays fanfare*
H did manage to squeeze in that "while hes not particularly good" 
It's hard (impossible) to "directly" compare races because obviously not all people are equally skilled. But saying that there isn't a problem because some (very skilled) people are still doing reasonable well is being in denial.
I honestly hadn't looked at the problem in that way: Unknown players getting good results on ONLY 1 race could indeed point to some balance problem. Although saying they are all bad is probably not the most objective way to go about getting that message across
With the problem being how many possible openings Terran has and how hard it is for Zerg to scout and prepare for them, does anybody else think it'll take more than a balance patch to sort this out? Like an expansion pack with new units?
|
I looked through the SC2 database on rts-sanctuary.com and came up with this data:
Percentage of races used by the top 50 across all leagues with
no filters:
Zerg: 22%
Terran: 44%
Protoss: 20%
Random: 14%
only diamond league players:
Zerg: 20%
Terran: 40%
Protoss: 34%
Random: 6%
only players with more than 100 games played:
Zerg: 20%
Terran: 42%
Protoss: 32%
Random: 6%
Percentage of races of the top 50 players with the highest win percentage while having played more than 50 games:
Zerg: 26%
Terran: 32%
Protoss: 38%
Random: 4%
Now, I can see the Terran fanboys arguing that checking only the top 50 of the world has hardly any statistical value, and I agree. However, doing it this way is even in the Terran's favour, because their easy macro mechanics play a lesser role at top level, where macro mechanics should be close to perfect. Same goes with micro. Lower players with mediocre micro skills will have a lot more difficulty facing a ridiculous ranged terran army than the pros.
Therefore, these numbers will improve in the Terran's favour the more players we include. This might turn around at the bronze leagues again, where zergs just baneling bust every game, but that is not the balance issue at hand anyway.
EDIT: Protoss being the race with the highest win percentage is interesting. I think we have a fairly large 4-warpgate-push community in our mids.
|
On August 06 2010 22:21 NeoLearner wrote:
With the problem being how many possible openings Terran has and how hard it is for Zerg to scout and prepare for them, does anybody else think it'll take more than a balance patch to sort this out? Like an expansion pack with new units?
Nah, the units needed are there; nydus worm, overlord, mutalisk. They just need to be made viable, especially against Terran.
|
On August 06 2010 22:36 mathemagician1986 wrote:
I looked through the SC2 database on rts-sanctuary.com and came up with this data:
Percentage of races used by the top 50 across all leagues with
no filters:
Zerg: 22%
Terran: 44%
Protoss: 20%
Random: 14%
only diamond league players:
Zerg: 20%
Terran: 40%
Protoss: 34%
Random: 6%
only players with more than 100 games played:
Zerg: 20%
Terran: 42%
Protoss: 32%
Random: 6%
Percentage of races of the top 50 players with the highest win percentage while having played more than 50 games:
Zerg: 26%
Terran: 32%
Protoss: 38%
Random: 4%
Now, I can see the Terran fanboys arguing that checking only the top 50 of the world has hardly any statistical value, and I agree. However, doing it this way is even in the Terran's favour, because their easy macro mechanics play a lesser role at top level, where macro mechanics should be close to perfect. Same goes with micro. Lower players with mediocre micro skills will have a lot more difficulty facing a ridiculous ranged terran army than the pros.
Therefore, these numbers will improve in the Terran's favour the more players we include. This might turn around at the bronze leagues again, where zergs just baneling bust every game, but that is not the balance issue at hand anyway.
EDIT: Protoss being the race with the highest win percentage is interesting. I think we have a fairly large 4-warpgate-push community in our mids.
I think looking at the top players is very revealling. Bonze and Silver are mostly fileld with Terran players -- newer players almost always start with Terran (new players like human races and are familair with them from the campaign). When you get to the higher leagues, you should be getting an accurate meassure of everything. While it can't be proven, it seems fairly obvious why the top is so lop-sided: many of the current diamond level Terran players would not be in Diamond if they didn't play Terran.
|
The more skilled players should be looked at. Bronze and silver (and gold to an extent) players can't play Terran correctly, hence why they have all these buffs. It equalizes them as a race at the lower levels but it completely imbalances Terran at the higher levels.
Is it possible someone could get Idra on the phone with Blizzard? Maybe they will listen? Are they listening? Have there been a lot of complaints about this to them directly?
|
i was pretty much #1 whiner on this matchup being imbalanced
but after watching how successful check is w/ his style of play, im beginning to think this matchup is balanced
except you have to open with zergling speed into muta
or you die horribly in multiple ways
I've pretty much doubled my win% vs terran once i stopped doing 14pool 16 hatch (hundreds of games later, i now know this.. better late than never)
|
On August 06 2010 20:39 Whole wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2010 18:37 IdrA wrote:
stupid people will argue that they arent unskilled just because they were unknown (and thats not my argument, theyre unskilled because theyre bad, but you people dont seem to understand that), but if thats the case how come theres almost no one previously unknown having similar success with z/p? there are a few, like huk, and while hes not particularly good hes shown consistent results across multiple patches. unlike the tens of terrans who've popped up since the beginning of phase 2. IdrA basically explained the current situation perfectly. Also, due to a bunch of bad Terrans appearing, I think IdrA is showing a little...very tiny piece of respect for Huk. *plays fanfare*
Also says the problem is with terran not with zerg, which I agree.
I personally play terran and would not be against a nerf. Protoss got nerfed into oblivion during the beta: went from overpowered to pretty much having to cheese early game to get some wins (at high level). So why not.
|
On August 06 2010 23:13 billyX333 wrote:
but after watching how successful check is w/ his style of play, im beginning to think this matchup is balanced
except you have to open with zergling speed into muta
or you die horribly in multiple ways
Only games of check I seen are the ones where his opponents do not go all mech and do nooby stuff during the game like trying to fight mutalisks with vikings LOL.
@Idra: have you tried to contact Blizzard in any way about your views?
|
As a Terran player, I really like a lot of your ideas, especially the viking and bunker changes. The viking micro described in the video looked pretty exciting and I definitely agree that bunkers should have more of an economic impact than they currently do.
What if bunker salvage gave back minerals proportional to the amount of health left on the bunker? So a bunker with 60% of its health left would give 60 minerals.
I'm not sure I like your MULE change. I agree that Terran macro needs to be more involving but this solution seems too ugly, for lack of a better term.
Im pretty neutral on the rest of your ideas.
|
Well reducing tank siege damage to 35 to light and 70 to armored would be cool as well as splash to 50% of that damage. Tanks would go back to how they were in BW (they were OK). Lings and hydras and zealots would be back as useful units against tanks, while ultras would be countered easier.
|
I coulnd agree less tbh
how are these things going to help Z win versus T ?
these points don't even adress the problems you guys think Z has vs T
imo theirs rly nothing wrong with this matchup its just people doing their same retarded build orders then in the beta then whining it doesnt work i mean you cant just mass roaches & hydras A-move and expect to win...
you will never win with an A-move as zerg if u don't like it reroll cus you obviously can't pull it off
-you need to flank
-burrow banelings (if he goes bio..)
-muta harass -> zerglings to the front i mean come on
-.......
you just have to attack where they arent, when they come to defend run away and move out
then go attack somewhere else is it all that hard ??
if you use zero strategy you won't win i tought this was common knowledge
i play Z i have no problems vs T,
my T brother doesnt even wanna play me anymore cus its allways the same he can't win 9/10 & hes same skill as me
|
On August 06 2010 23:53 -Archangel- wrote:
Well reducing tank siege damage to 35 to light and 70 to armored would be cool as well as splash to 50% of that damage. Tanks would go back to how they were in BW (they were OK). Lings and hydras and zealots would be back as useful units against tanks, while ultras would be countered easier.
Tanks demolished every ground unit in sc1 so pls... Ultralisks just destroy mech so hard!
|
United Kingdom12022 Posts
Just played a TvZI had a chat with the guy at the end about how he's supposed to beat a meching Terran. The trouble is, I don't think it's Terran is overpowered, I just don't think the Arsenal zerg has to deal with Terran is well equipped enough to face mech.
Although, it did give me an idea. If you use a combination of funal growth on the army and Nydus at the same time, it could lead to interesting counter attacks as you wouldn't be able to get back to your base. Even so, I don't think Terran is over powerful as TvP seems to swing both ways right now, I think it's Z isn't well equipped with stratergies yet to deal with Terran. This is mainly coming down to the amount of top players playing Terran. I mean for two people I can think of that I've learnt from is both TLO and Jinro, they've both used some fantastic stratergies against zerg and the other races and really have helped Terran get to where they are stratergy wise, but there's just not many zergs to do that.
I'm not saying no change is nessecary, but I don't think Terran need to be changed, more zerg given a buff in certain ways, nothing drastic to imbalance ZvP, just enough to make it easier against Terran, like maybe giving the Nydus worm more health and make it pop out faster, or maybe getting burrow earliar in the tech tree and make roach burrow cheaper. (Roach burrow is so gay if you don't have detection and they get up under your tanks, sigh  )
|
On August 06 2010 23:57 Dente wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2010 23:53 -Archangel- wrote:
Well reducing tank siege damage to 35 to light and 70 to armored would be cool as well as splash to 50% of that damage. Tanks would go back to how they were in BW (they were OK). Lings and hydras and zealots would be back as useful units against tanks, while ultras would be countered easier. Tanks demolished every ground unit in sc1 so pls... Ultralisks just destroy mech so hard!
Lol, no they didn't. Zealots would own them, that is why mines were used as well as tanks not getting grouped. Tanks in BW did half damage to lings and zealots.
|
Please dont hate the Terran players!!!
I am a Terran, both in BW and SC2, and I am starting to feel really unappreciated.
Don't think we are happy with the idea of an easy win.
So if you want to hate the match-up, no problem. But dont hate the players playing it. Don't think that Terran players play with Terran only because we think its easier to play. But most of all dont think that every time you lose against a Terran its only because the match-up is unbalanced. Some Terran players are actually good 
|
On August 06 2010 23:54 Prae wrote:
I coulnd agree less tbh
how are these things going to help Z win versus T ?
these points don't even adress the problems you guys think Z has vs T
imo theirs rly nothing wrong with this matchup its just people doing their same retarded build orders then in the beta then whining it doesnt work i mean you cant just mass roaches & hydras A-move and expect to win...
you will never win with an A-move as zerg if u don't like it reroll cus you obviously can't pull it off
-you need to flank
-burrow banelings (if he goes bio..)
-muta harass -> zerglings to the front i mean come on
-.......
you just have to attack where they arent, when they come to defend run away and move out
then go attack somewhere else is it all that hard ??
if you use zero strategy you won't win i tought this was common knowledge
i play Z i have no problems vs T,
my T brother doesnt even wanna play me anymore cus its allways the same he can't win 9/10 & hes same skill as me
i would love to see some replays. im really bad against most of my terran opponents
|
On August 06 2010 23:54 Prae wrote:
I coulnd agree less tbh
how are these things going to help Z win versus T ?
these points don't even adress the problems you guys think Z has vs T
imo theirs rly nothing wrong with this matchup its just people doing their same retarded build orders then in the beta then whining it doesnt work i mean you cant just mass roaches & hydras A-move and expect to win...
you will never win with an A-move as zerg if u don't like it reroll cus you obviously can't pull it off
-you need to flank
-burrow banelings (if he goes bio..)
-muta harass -> zerglings to the front i mean come on
-.......
you just have to attack where they arent, when they come to defend run away and move out
then go attack somewhere else is it all that hard ??
if you use zero strategy you won't win i tought this was common knowledge
i play Z i have no problems vs T,
my T brother doesnt even wanna play me anymore cus its allways the same he can't win 9/10 & hes same skill as me
I do not a-move my units to T tank line. I try to flank and use burrow-move roaches (this only works against non-top players). I avoid fighting directly with mutalisks as long as possible and harass instead. Usually when the terran builds a couple of towers in his base and sees that if he tries to chase my mutas he will not move out of his base until I have 5+ bases he just decides to a-move to victory. I have to then return with mutas as they cannot kill his base enough for me to realistically consider base trade. I also do not clump mutas when fighting thors and manually spread them if needed (does not help at all if he has 4+ thors).
Only games I ever won against decent terrans were by hiding muta tech or by getting Ultras before they decided to A-move to victory.
Maybe your brother is not that good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
