|
Greetings. Long time Zerg player, Diamond, blah blah blah.
Let's get the nasty stuff out of the way first: ZvT sucks. Zerg has paltry options compared to Terran, they cannot attack consistently until lategame, they are harassed to no end, etc. Maybe the problem lies with the units?
As we all know, Starcraft ll has the bonus damage system. Let's observe which units Zerg have that deal bonus damage, and which ones Terran have.
Zerglings - Nope
Baneling - Yes! The only unit before Tier 2 that does!
Roach - Nope
Hydralisk - Nope
Mutalisk - Nope
Queen - Nope
Corrupter - Yes! SUCCESS! It only took 2 bases and 12 minutes to get to a solely AA unit! Oh wait, but it's only vs. Massive.
Brood Lord - Nope
Ultralisk - Yes! Vs. Armored too!
So, 3/9, (fixed) and I didn't count the Infestor because it has no attack.
Marine - Nay
Marauder - Yes, and it doubles its damage.
Siege Tank - When unsieged, yes, and it attacks incredibly quickly.
Reaper - Yes, vs Light AND vs. Buildings
Hellions - Yes, and with an upgrade, deal insane amounts of damage to Light.
Ghost - Yes, and has an ability that will deal massive amounts of damage to any unit for only 25 energy.
Viking - Yes, but only in the air.
Banshee - Nay
Battlecruiser - Nay
Thor - Nay, and thankfully too. It doesn't even need it.
So, for Terran we have 6/10. Wow, that's over HALF, and three times the amount of Zerg. Also, every single unit that does have bonus damage can attack ground in some way.
Just for fun, let's do Protoss too:
Zealot - Nay
Stalker - Yes, vs. armored.
Sentry - Nay
Immortal - Yes, and it more than doubles its damage.
Pheonix - Yes
Void Ray - Yes
Carrier - Nay
Collosus - Nay
Dark Templar - Nay
Mothership - Nay
4/10 That's not bad, for its only a little higher than the units Zerg has, and three of those can attack ground armies. But thankfully this only factors into PvZ the right amount, as that matchup is very close to balanced and fun to play.
Maybe the reason Zerg has such awful early and mid-game defense is because every unit they have can be countered by a Tier 1 or Tier 2 unit from both of the other races, while providing only one unit that can counter back, and only against light units. Hell, the only + armored unit they have is Tier 3, and getting a decent number out is half the battle in itself.
Discuss.
|
Pretty sure lack of bonus damage has nothing to do with balance of the game
|
On August 05 2010 03:54 AyJay wrote:
Pretty sure lack of bonus damage has nothing to do with balance of the game
Yea I agree with this.
If anything the lack of bonuses on Zerg units is a better idea, given the fact that the Zerg are supposed to be an all consuming swarm and massing them is better then giving each one a specialized role. It let's each unit have a different use then a forced role.
|
The point on the reaper is a little moot because you rarely use it in an army and solely for is job of harassing.
The ghost ability part works only on bio units which is the majority of units in a whole game sense but in some match-ups isn't as effective as it sounds such as a VR attack vs mech/ghost.
|
What ayjay said. Zerg unit's dps is very solid against all units. Hydras have one of the highest dps in the entire game for its cost. Roaches also have very high burst damage available quite early as well. In fact, I think the lack of Zerg being based on bonus damage is very much a good thing as it allows their armies to react to pretty much everything, as opposed to being more specialized.
|
Wow that's pretty crazy I never realized this.
|
Why do people love to do these side by side comparisons as if they mean anything? It's so obvious they're bogus.
|
You say Thor has no damage bonus... it actually does double damage vs. light.
|
I'm a Zerg player and even I'm getting sick of these Zerg UP, Terran OP threads... Thanks for the info, though, OP.
|
I agree with AyJay, I think the trouble that zergs is having will be overcome with more practice. Even though terran may seem really strong now they are not "overpowered" to the extend where you cannot overcome it.
|
On August 05 2010 03:52 Grimjim wrote:
Zerglings - Nope
Baneling - Yes! The only unit before 1.5 that does!
Roach - Nope
Hydralisk - Nope
Mutalisk - Nope
Queen - Nope
Corrupter - Yes! SUCCESS! It only took 2 bases and 12 minutes to get to a solely AA unit! Oh wait, but it's only vs. Massive.
Brood Lord - Nope
Ultralisk - Yes! Vs. Armored too!
So, 2/8, and I didn't count the Infestor because it has no attack.
I count 3/9, not 2/8. And baneling is actually T1.5 (requires extra building on top of spawning pool)
|
I think that logic is backwards -- the game is balanced so the bonus damage just makes that unit that much worse against other unit types.
|
Zerg can tech switch easily. All of their units are solid combat units. Zerg is about NOT getting countered, not about countering their stuff.
Many zerg counters do exist, but within unit design not bonus dmg. IE zerglings pwn stalkers, roaches pwn zealots.
|
Pretty sure lack of bonus damage has nothing to do with balance of the game
This, whats your point OP
|
lol @ all the terran players getting upset over this
|
On August 05 2010 04:19 Philip2110 wrote:This, whats your point OP
I think OP's point is that if you take an equal supply of some zerg unit, you can find some equal supply of terran units that will rape its face off.
|
On August 05 2010 04:13 BlasiuS wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 03:52 Grimjim wrote:
Zerglings - Nope
Baneling - Yes! The only unit before 1.5 that does!
Roach - Nope
Hydralisk - Nope
Mutalisk - Nope
Queen - Nope
Corrupter - Yes! SUCCESS! It only took 2 bases and 12 minutes to get to a solely AA unit! Oh wait, but it's only vs. Massive.
Brood Lord - Nope
Ultralisk - Yes! Vs. Armored too!
So, 2/8, and I didn't count the Infestor because it has no attack.
I count 3/9, not 2/8. And baneling is actually T1.5 (requires extra building on top of spawning pool)
Yeah, I originally wrote out all but the Baneling, then stuck it in once I remembered it >_>
So it is 3/9. My apologies.
|
On August 05 2010 04:28 JinNJuice wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 04:19 Philip2110 wrote:
Pretty sure lack of bonus damage has nothing to do with balance of the game
This, whats your point OP I think OP's point is that if you take an equal supply of some zerg unit, you can find some equal supply of terran units that will rape its face off.
So you play rock-paper-scissors and get the unit that counters the terran's unit. :|
|
On August 05 2010 04:19 Philip2110 wrote:This, whats your point OP
Oh, lack of bonus damage has nothing to do with the balance?
Then let's take it all out then. Let's see how that changes things.
|
Anyone else feel like people are just now starting to cry over "issues" that have been in the game for months now. I do not personally feel like the +damage argument is valid. Yes it means the terran units are able to be more specialized but as a random diamond player i also feel that it gives zerg more consistency. I personally rather have something do 6 damage than 4+3armored, since that constant 6 is more applicable in all situations.
Ill give the OP that units like the baneling, immortal, and hellion that gain nearly double its damage in the +damage part might need to be revisted.
|
On August 05 2010 04:21 peachsncream wrote:
lol @ all the terran players getting upset over this
I'm a zerg player and I'm upset with these stupid threads.
|
On August 05 2010 04:32 tipakee wrote:
Edit
Been fixed. Contribute or troll somewhere else.
|
On August 05 2010 04:31 MangoTango wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 04:28 JinNJuice wrote:On August 05 2010 04:19 Philip2110 wrote:
Pretty sure lack of bonus damage has nothing to do with balance of the game
This, whats your point OP I think OP's point is that if you take an equal supply of some zerg unit, you can find some equal supply of terran units that will rape its face off. So you play rock-paper-scissors and get the unit that counters the terran's unit. :|
What zerg unit counters a terran unit. Sure, blings can blow up marines if they get close enough but you need to be either burrowed and pray that terran doesnt scan, or have speed upgrade. There's nothing for Zerg that says, oh he went marauders, let me go *This* to counter him hard. It's the other way around, "oh he went roaches, let me go heavy marauders," or "he went hydra/ling, let me get lots of hellions with preigniter upgrade" Zerg's strength is in numbers/macro but its hard to do that early game when you're trying to defend against early hellion harass with lings who melt to them.
|
On August 05 2010 04:33 cr4ckshot wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 04:21 peachsncream wrote:
lol @ all the terran players getting upset over this I'm a zerg player and I'm upset with these stupid threads.
Then ignore them and post elsewhere.
|
On August 05 2010 04:32 Grimjim wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 04:19 Philip2110 wrote:
Pretty sure lack of bonus damage has nothing to do with balance of the game
This, whats your point OP Oh, lack of bonus damage has nothing to do with the balance? Then let's take it all out then. Let's see how that changes things.
I think you missed the point, since Zerg does fine without these specific bonus damage versus x, and terran does fine with bonus damage, it's balanced, ergo it would be unbalanced without bonus damageVsX.
|
On August 05 2010 04:21 peachsncream wrote:
lol @ all the terran players getting upset over this
Why do you assume every here is a terran player?
As others have noted they are Z players and getting sick of these threads.
Sure there's P players in here getting sick of these threads.
I'm a random player and I'm getting sick of these threads.
Personally I've stopped visiting TL as much because of all the 'Z is SOOOO UP and T is SOOOOO OP' threads.
|
On August 05 2010 03:52 Grimjim wrote:
Let's get the nasty stuff out of the way first: ZvT sucks.
Agreed.
|
On August 05 2010 04:34 Grimjim wrote:Been fixed. Contribute or troll somewhere else.
sorry my original post was just out of frustration of all the TvZ drama latley, i edited after rereading it
|
On August 05 2010 04:37 Egnarts wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 04:32 Grimjim wrote:On August 05 2010 04:19 Philip2110 wrote:
Pretty sure lack of bonus damage has nothing to do with balance of the game
This, whats your point OP Oh, lack of bonus damage has nothing to do with the balance? Then let's take it all out then. Let's see how that changes things. I think you missed the point, since Zerg does fine without these specific bonus damage versus x, and terran does fine with bonus damage, it's balanced, ergo it would be unbalanced without bonus damageVsX.
And I think you missed the fact that ZvT is far from fine.
|
On August 05 2010 04:31 MangoTango wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 04:28 JinNJuice wrote:On August 05 2010 04:19 Philip2110 wrote:
Pretty sure lack of bonus damage has nothing to do with balance of the game
This, whats your point OP I think OP's point is that if you take an equal supply of some zerg unit, you can find some equal supply of terran units that will rape its face off. So you play rock-paper-scissors and get the unit that counters the terran's unit. :|
The OP's point was that Zerg doesn't really have any rock-paper scissors units. They have some sort of strange rock that's made out of paper-mache that also has a broken pair of scissors stabbed into it.
Really the biggest problem with this is that when a Zerg is behind, he can't exactly just make the "counter" unit and hope that it's enough to put the game back in his favor, he just has to hope that some miracle of unit positioning or army micro can make his less-cost effective army come out victorious.
|
That terran can then set on fire?
I don't really think the lack of bonus damage is the crux of balance problems for Z or for P, but I do think terran have too much bonus damage on their units. (Read: Z/P don't need more, Terran need less). It's quite frustrating having your armies so readily countered by standard T compositions.
|
Russian Federation145 Posts
Please, if you remove all of the bonus damage modifiers and balance the units to not suck I'm all for it. Many times have I been stuck with a bunch of marauders against chargelotsentry/speedlings and wished they weren't entirely worthless against them.
|
I thought banshees dealt bonus to armoured .__. I was wrong
|
This doesn't seem terribly valid. Pure damage is the best type of damage because it always applies, and units that do bonus damage do less pure damage to compensate. It's not like they're just handing it out for free.
An example: the new Siege Tank does a full twenty damage less than its BW counterpart despite costing significantly more, but it's still an amazing unit because it hits everything for full power. Obviously there are other factors like unit clumping and the loss of overkill, but the 50 damage Tank is still incredibly dangerous when 50 really means 50.
Even if you don't get to counter people with bonus damage, you still have armor types to use against them. You may not have an obvious +armored unit to throw at Marauders until Hive tech (although most +armored units are also armored themselves, so it's still largely a mirror matchup), but you've got light units against which the 100/25/2 guy does worse damage than a single Marine...and don't forget Banelings and Queens, which straight up have no armor type.
|
Good point but i dont find Z that UP tbh
|
Zerg is fine stop whining, either go learn how to play or just switch to a different race.
Who won the KOTB hmmmm?
|
I think the +dmg is just a way for blizzard to balance the game easier.
Look at the ultralisk, they changed his damages with a bonus to give them a role.
|
On August 05 2010 05:20 Ksyper wrote:
Zerg is fine stop whining, either go learn how to play or just switch to a different race.
Who won the KOTB hmmmm?
Lol. Whining about whining is even funnier. It's a bit sad the "time and effort" you'll put into putting people down instead of actually contributing anything positive.
I don't see many people here crying about balances/imbalances except the people who come in here crying about people-who-are-crying. Lol?
But on topic, Sc2 does feel balance, but really this:
On August 05 2010 04:59 Craton wrote:
It's quite frustrating having your armies so readily countered by standard T compositions.
|
might not be the lack of bonus for zerg but the bonus Terran gets
as you stated Protoss only has 4 so Protoss players migh as well start complaining about it
|
i totally agree with this post. nerf the hydralisk so it does 6 damage then + 4 to light. and roach can be 8 damage + 4 to armored. or w/e it original damage is now but nerfed to regular units. trust me not having + damage is better and more well rounded then having + unless you're an immortal. than you want the bonus damage.stalkers are terribad vs hydralisks as hellions are against everything that is not light.
|
On August 05 2010 04:37 Egnarts wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 04:32 Grimjim wrote:On August 05 2010 04:19 Philip2110 wrote:
Pretty sure lack of bonus damage has nothing to do with balance of the game
This, whats your point OP Oh, lack of bonus damage has nothing to do with the balance? Then let's take it all out then. Let's see how that changes things. I think you missed the point, since Zerg does fine without these specific bonus damage versus x, and terran does fine with bonus damage, it's balanced, ergo it would be unbalanced without bonus damageVsX.
Exactly. For example if we remove ultralisk + bonus attack but then it should be compensated by giving health, speed or some ability. This game isn't balanced around all races having same amount of units doing +damage against armored units.
|
Good point, I didn't notice before. I guess thats another why zerg is doing really bad
|
Thor - Nay, and thankfully too. It doesn't even need it.
I'm surprised nobody has brought this up, but the thor DOES have bonus damage (GtA attack versus light -- and it has splash, too). In my opinion, this is the most gamebreaking example of bonus damage with AoE, since mutalisks are the logical T2 zerg response to tanks/hellions/marauders, but are nullified by a mech unit unlocked by a building a mecher would build early anyway (who goes mech without attack upgrades -- siege mode tanks get +5 damage per upgrade)!
|
While not wanting to get into the whole discussion of whether or not something is OP, some people here seem to fail to realize that Bonus damage is not free bonus damage. You can also read a unit like, for example, the marauder, which does 10 (+ 10 vs armored) as if he would do 20 (- 10 vs not armored). That means exactly the same. But in this case, it does not sound like it is a good thing, but rather that it is a bad thing. If the marauder would not do bonus damage at all, he probably would do something like 14 or 15 damage to everything.
Bonus damage is not something you get for free, it is more like a tradeoff. You get to be more effective vs one thing, but less effective versus other stuff. Also, Bonus damage is not the only mechanic that works that way. Movement speed, range, and many other things also make units counter other units. The only difference is that in this case, it is made obvious by a tooltip.
You could just add up the total range of the units, and probably terran would come out on top, and from that comparison conclude that terran is Op. Or the total Movement speed, and maybe find out that Zerg has in total the fastest units if you average between on creep and off creep, or something like that. Than you conclude that Zerg is best because they have faster stuff. This is also obviously stupid.
|
I'm not a huge fan of the bonus damage system but it is what it is. Nothing is more annoying to me than watching 4 marauders get dropped by a nexus of mine and they destroy it in a matter of seconds.
I really believe that a basic unit comp and knowing what you're doing with micro will get your much farther than trying to counter with a better unit comp and 1-Aing.
|
On August 05 2010 03:54 AyJay wrote:
Pretty sure lack of bonus damage has nothing to do with balance of the game
Of course it does. It's no coincidence that Terran units have the most bonus damage and are also the strongest race. Bonus damage means your "counter" units counter better, which can translate into a huge advantage.
|
United States47024 Posts
On August 05 2010 05:53 Graven wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 03:54 AyJay wrote:
Pretty sure lack of bonus damage has nothing to do with balance of the game Of course it does. It's no coincidence that Terran units have the most bonus damage and are also the strongest race. Bonus damage means your "counter" units are counter better, which can translate into a huge advantage.
Then how come Terran had the most units with bonus damage in SC1, and that was reasonably balanced?
Bonus damage in and of itself is irrelevant to balance. It's all a numbers tweak. Suppose you have 3 otherwise identical units. One does 30 damage, the other does 15+15 vs armored, and the other does 30+15 vs armored. The 2nd one is strictly worse than the first one. The third one is always better than the first one. This should imply that there is some intermediate that is of equal utility to the first one.
|
On August 05 2010 05:57 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 05:53 Graven wrote:On August 05 2010 03:54 AyJay wrote:
Pretty sure lack of bonus damage has nothing to do with balance of the game Of course it does. It's no coincidence that Terran units have the most bonus damage and are also the strongest race. Bonus damage means your "counter" units are counter better, which can translate into a huge advantage. Then how come Terran had the most units with bonus damage in SC1, and that was reasonably balanced? Bonus damage in and of itself is irrelevant to balance.
I find it both difficult and illogical to revolve arguments concering SC2 around SC1. There's simply no reason to involve SC1 in this discussion -- they're entirely different games with entirely different mechanics. Not to mention, SC1 was balanced in the same way you'd use duct tape to fit a round peg in a square hole. There's no reason to assume the same should be done for SC2 right now -- the game is in its infancy and it's not too late to make changes to the foundation.
|
thors do more damage to light units anti air.
|
On August 05 2010 05:57 TheYango wrote:
Pretty sure lack of bonus damage has nothing to do with balance of the game
Bonus damage in and of itself is irrelevant to balance. It's all a numbers tweak. Suppose you have 3 otherwise identical units. One does 30 damage, the other does 15+15 vs armored, and the other does 30+15 vs armored. The 2nd one is strictly worse than the first one. The third one is always better than the first one. This should imply that there is some intermediate that is of equal utility to the first one.
Not at all. You are ignoring a few variables, such as cost and the units that are in battle. The second unit is not strictly worse than the first if it costs less and you only make it when you know the opponent is using armored units. The third one is not always better than the first if it costs more and your opponent is only making light units.
Bonus damage changes counters, which are a huge part of SC2.
|
United States47024 Posts
On August 05 2010 06:02 Graven wrote:
I find it both difficult and illogical to revolve arguments concering SC2 around SC1. There's simply no reason to involve SC1 in this discussion -- they're entirely different games with entirely different mechanics. Not to mention, SC1 was balanced in the same way you'd use duct tape to fit a round peg in a square hole. There's no reason to assume the same should be done for SC2 right now -- the game is in its infancy and it's not too late to make changes to the foundation.
Even if you disagree, you have to admit that in SC1, the game was balanced *in spite* of the bonus damage disparity--the game was balanced while still maintaining Terran's racial identity of highly specialized responses. It would be preferable to tweak the game in such a way to preserve that racial identity, rather than just handing it to another race and homogenizing things--especially when it's been proven to be doable in the past.
On August 05 2010 06:06 Graven wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 05:57 TheYango wrote:
Pretty sure lack of bonus damage has nothing to do with balance of the game
Bonus damage in and of itself is irrelevant to balance. It's all a numbers tweak. Suppose you have 3 otherwise identical units. One does 30 damage, the other does 15+15 vs armored, and the other does 30+15 vs armored. The 2nd one is strictly worse than the first one. The third one is always better than the first one. This should imply that there is some intermediate that is of equal utility to the first one. Not at all. You are ignoring a few variables, such as cost and the units that are in battle. The second unit is not strictly worse than the first if it costs less and you only make it when you know the opponent is using armored units. The third one is not always better than the first if it costs more and your opponent is only making light units. Bonus damage changes counters, which are a huge part of SC2.
Did you miss the words "otherwise identical"?
My point was that for a given zerg unit that you want to give bonus damage, you could select some constant amount of non-bonus damage that would give it the exact same utility.
|
On August 05 2010 06:06 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 06:02 Graven wrote:
I find it both difficult and illogical to revolve arguments concering SC2 around SC1. There's simply no reason to involve SC1 in this discussion -- they're entirely different games with entirely different mechanics. Not to mention, SC1 was balanced in the same way you'd use duct tape to fit a round peg in a square hole. There's no reason to assume the same should be done for SC2 right now -- the game is in its infancy and it's not too late to make changes to the foundation. Even if you disagree, you have to admit that in SC1, the game was balanced *in spite* of the bonus damage disparity--the game was balanced while still maintaining Terran's racial identity of highly specialized responses. It would be preferable to tweak the game in such a way to preserve that racial identity, rather than just handing it to another race and homogenizing things--especially when it's been proven to be doable in the past.
Terran weren't nearly as versatile in SC1, making it less of an issue. The designers have given them the ability to swap reactors and tech labs at will, and given them every cute trick/gimmick in the game, in addition to preserving their "racial identity" of tons of bonus damage.
|
As a Zerg player I see all these threads about ZvT, and I rarely see people complaining about the infestor nerfs that have taken place. Am I the only Zerg player that thinks if the took of the upgrade for neural parasite everything would be ok again?
|
United States47024 Posts
On August 05 2010 06:10 Graven wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 06:06 TheYango wrote:On August 05 2010 06:02 Graven wrote:
I find it both difficult and illogical to revolve arguments concering SC2 around SC1. There's simply no reason to involve SC1 in this discussion -- they're entirely different games with entirely different mechanics. Not to mention, SC1 was balanced in the same way you'd use duct tape to fit a round peg in a square hole. There's no reason to assume the same should be done for SC2 right now -- the game is in its infancy and it's not too late to make changes to the foundation. Even if you disagree, you have to admit that in SC1, the game was balanced *in spite* of the bonus damage disparity--the game was balanced while still maintaining Terran's racial identity of highly specialized responses. It would be preferable to tweak the game in such a way to preserve that racial identity, rather than just handing it to another race and homogenizing things--especially when it's been proven to be doable in the past. Terran weren't nearly as versatile in SC1, making it less of an issue. The designers have given them the ability to swap reactors and tech labs at will, and given them every cute trick/gimmick in the game, in addition to preserving their "racial identity" of tons of bonus damage.
Their intent was probably to give everyone "cute gimmicks", its just that the ones they gave to other races (or at least to Zerg--Warp Gates are pretty damn good) are more lackluster. Again, it should be possible to deal with those things, rather than just upping the bonus damage.
|
On August 05 2010 06:06 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 06:02 Graven wrote:
I find it both difficult and illogical to revolve arguments concering SC2 around SC1. There's simply no reason to involve SC1 in this discussion -- they're entirely different games with entirely different mechanics. Not to mention, SC1 was balanced in the same way you'd use duct tape to fit a round peg in a square hole. There's no reason to assume the same should be done for SC2 right now -- the game is in its infancy and it's not too late to make changes to the foundation. Even if you disagree, you have to admit that in SC1, the game was balanced *in spite* of the bonus damage disparity--the game was balanced while still maintaining Terran's racial identity of highly specialized responses. It would be preferable to tweak the game in such a way to preserve that racial identity, rather than just handing it to another race and homogenizing things--especially when it's been proven to be doable in the past. Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 06:06 Graven wrote:On August 05 2010 05:57 TheYango wrote:
Pretty sure lack of bonus damage has nothing to do with balance of the game
Bonus damage in and of itself is irrelevant to balance. It's all a numbers tweak. Suppose you have 3 otherwise identical units. One does 30 damage, the other does 15+15 vs armored, and the other does 30+15 vs armored. The 2nd one is strictly worse than the first one. The third one is always better than the first one. This should imply that there is some intermediate that is of equal utility to the first one. Not at all. You are ignoring a few variables, such as cost and the units that are in battle. The second unit is not strictly worse than the first if it costs less and you only make it when you know the opponent is using armored units. The third one is not always better than the first if it costs more and your opponent is only making light units. Bonus damage changes counters, which are a huge part of SC2. Did you miss the words " otherwise identical"?
Oh, so we're discussing imaginary units. My apologies. I thought we were discussing Terran units, which do not fall under your hypothetical. The fact is simple, when you combine these variables, Terran have an advantage when they know what they need to respond to. You can't play all of this out on paper or in a unit tester. Players controlling the race do not build things randomly.
|
IMHO there is a reason for this, one aspect that zerg players aren't taking advantage of is being able to make super rapid tech switches by building a single building, by allowing too many units with bonus damage those tech switches would be overpoweringly strong.
The zerg strength is the rapid tech switch, no other race is as easily able to do it as the zerg. Take advantage of it, and you won't need the bonus damage.
|
On August 05 2010 05:57 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 05:53 Graven wrote:On August 05 2010 03:54 AyJay wrote:
Pretty sure lack of bonus damage has nothing to do with balance of the game Of course it does. It's no coincidence that Terran units have the most bonus damage and are also the strongest race. Bonus damage means your "counter" units are counter better, which can translate into a huge advantage. Then how come Terran had the most units with bonus damage in SC1, and that was reasonably balanced?
I agree with what you're saying, but it's incorrect to talk about "bonus" damage in SC1 since the system was completely different (it still operated on damage type but used reductions, not bonuses, for units of different types).
If anything, you could be making the argument that SC1 reductions by type was/is a superior system to bonuses since SC1 is obviously balanced and SC2 is possibly balanced (it's too early to tell -- it was released less than a month ago).
I think the OP is simply making the observation that Zerg seems to have the least dedicated, limited-role counter units of the 3 races. It's not necessarily a good or bad thing and it's an interesting facet of balance that hasn't really been explored before (as I've said above, the SC1 system was pretty different). I agree that using these observations as ammunition for claiming Zerg is underpowered is probably premature at best, but we shouldn't refrain from an impartial discussion of what the current bonus system means in terms of balance (and developer intent).
|
Terran units cost more, Terran units take longer to build.
Zerg can reproduce their army in seconds, Zerg has units with many insane abilities like the muta hitting several targets, queen with many abilities, broodlords which are insane with their mass broodling tank/damage, Banelings absolutely DESTROY bio units with "a-move".
Im not saying that it is a balanced matchup, but im just so sick of all these zerg players making these threads of zerg being so horrible and unplayable vs terran. Terran has free win vs zerg and there is not a single thing zerg can do to stop it.
Give me a break please!
|
United States47024 Posts
On August 05 2010 06:13 Graven wrote:
Oh, so we're discussing imaginary units. My apologies. I thought we were discussing Terran units, which do not fall under your hypothetical. The fact is simple, when you combine these variables, Terran have an advantage when they know what they need to respond to. You can't play all of this out on paper or in a unit tester. Players controlling the race do not build things randomly.
Ok, suppose we use a more concrete example:
Suppose you want to give the roach some amount of bonus damage, say, +10 vs armored. Shouldn't there be some some amount of non-bonus damage that you can buff the Roach by that would give it the exact same amount of utility (e.g. +7 lets you 2-shot marines)? It may not be better in the exact same situations--but its overall utility has been increased, which should mean that matchup-wide you've achieved a similar effect.
Another thing to note: in the case of SC1, bonus damage was actually also a poor indicator of what units were good against what. Hydralisks do explosive damage. Siege Tanks are large, and do explosive damage. However, Hydralisks end up not fighting Siege Tanks very cost-effectively. Zealots are small. Hydralisks actually do very well against zealots.
|
On August 05 2010 04:59 Craton wrote:
It's quite frustrating having your armies so readily countered by standard T compositions.
agreed.
plus, the funny thing is: u dont really counter anything with zerg, u try and hope not to get countered.. 
|
Remember that Zerg units make up for it by having a consistently high DPS. So instead of having units that are superpowerful vs some things and much less so vs others, the units are moderately powerful vs everything. Of course, zerg units are very fragile and that good DPS doesn't do much good against the siege tanks firing from halfway across the map.
The real problem doesn't lie with bonuses. You don't need one massive overhaul to unit damage output to balance terran.
As much as terran annoys me sometime, it doesn't need a massive overhaul to be fixed.
The way to perfectly balance terran is MINDBLOWINGLY SIMPLE. make tank shots projectile, not hitscan. Siege tanks are powerful because they are hitscan. Because the engine allows only one unit to attack at a time (though on very short time intervals) and the siege tanks hit immediately, it gives the illusion of super-intelligent AI that smart target. In reality one siege tank fires and hits in the same intant, the next fires, and then when the target is killed, they move on to the next because they can't attack nothing. However, if the projectile doesn't hit by the time it's the next one's turn to fire, they can overkill. So making the shots projectiles; very fast, very near but not entirely immediate projectiles. That will make it so that siege tanks can overkill, but not so much that mech becomes useless. With a couple of tanks firing useless shots every volley, mech will be much more survivable but still potent enough to keep terran winning 50% of their games, which Blizzard interprets to mean balance.
|
zerg damage is so high its fair too say they do bonus damage too everything
|
The difference is that while the other races use their units that are strong vs Zergs, for the most part Zerg is based around avoiding the enemies strengths.
We are reactionary, whether we like it or not.
BTW - to everyone claiming that Zergs DPS is so high they dont need bonuses, please check this chart - http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=115345
In equal resource values, not including the bonuses, Terran beats is in nearly all areas. That's not even considering stim upgrades. Or the fact that Tanks do more dmg than every unit except Ultras, and it's huge ranged aoe. BC and Thors are easily the strongest in the game WITHOUT the bonuses.
So no... Zerg really is not "such huge DPS without the bonuses". Terran is. But they get bonuses too.
Protoss get huge health but mediocre DPS, and they are the ones that really rely on bonuses. Terrans in general are the most efficient across the board for their value.
|
I think the lack of bonus damage suits the Zerg style of outnumbering and overpowering the enemy with swarms of units. Terran/Protoss have more niched and powerful units, but are less mobile/flexible. If there is balance issues I think other things should be adjusted.
|
You can spin this bonus damage thing any way you want - it really means nothing. For instance:
Definitely Zerg is OP in TvZ because so many of their units always deal full damage, and so many terran units can't deal full damage all the time.
Zerglings - Nope
Baneling - Yes! They do so little damage to armored units.
Roach - Nope
Hydralisk - Nope
Mutalisk - Nope
Queen - Nope
Corrupter - Yes! They only deal full damage to BCs.
Brood Lord - Nope
Ultralisk - Yes! They do so little damage to light units.
So, 3/9, (fixed) and I didn't count the Infestor because it has no attack.
Marine - Nay
Marauder - Yes, it can barely damage light units - it does less DPS than marines to light units!
Siege Tank - When unsieged, yes, it sucks against light.
Reaper - Yes, they are useless against armored units.
Hellions - Yes, and even if they get their main damage upgrade, they still can barely damage armored.
Ghost - Yes - have you ever tried to kill a roach with its regular attack? Roach is so OP.
Viking - Yes, they don't even do full damage to mutalisks - they're so useless.
Banshee - Nay
Battlecruiser - Nay
Thor - OMG its supposed to be a strong AA, but its splash can hardly hurt armored air.
So, for Terran we have 6/10. Wow, that's over HALF, and two times the amount of Zerg. In particular against air, you have to get factory and starport tech to combat just spire tech. OMG terran is so UP.
|
so... you're sad that not all the races are the same?
stop your whining... it's stupid.
the zerg are supposed to just macro up a bunch of shit, and win with it. I agree that zerg should have a few more units to work with, but this thread is stupid.
|
On August 05 2010 04:21 peachsncream wrote:
lol @ all the terran players getting upset over this
yeah man, you realize that 90% of the posters in "zvt z is unbalanced" threads are terrans? look at the first 5 or so posts.
|
On August 05 2010 04:28 JinNJuice wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 04:19 Philip2110 wrote:
Pretty sure lack of bonus damage has nothing to do with balance of the game
This, whats your point OP I think OP's point is that if you take an equal supply of some zerg unit, you can find some equal supply of terran units that will rape its face off.
The entire point of the zerg is to not have equal supply, even when you reach 200/200 you should be able to restock faster and thus end up with higher supply
|
On August 05 2010 06:04 decemvrie wrote:
thors do more damage to light units anti air. Yes. OP, please update - Thor HAS bonus damage. (the irony is that a top zerg player knows best about terran units)
Now, I don't think this is a problem for zerg. I'd give away any bonuses if you buff the units properly, for example. Fewer bonuses within a race is GOOD for the race, it means it's more flexible. Zerg is the most flexible race. Terran is the most inflexible race with the largest tech-tree. Terrans can execute a great number of build orders and achieve various unit compositions, but they better choose them wisely (and scout well), because once taking some direction they can't switch easily, and the chosen units aren't as multi-functional as with other races.
That said, lol @ a bunch of terrans keep telling zerg how to play. I suggest them to become zerg and pwn along, if they so appreciate and understand the race.
|
On August 05 2010 06:31 tfmdjeff wrote: The way to perfectly balance terran is MINDBLOWINGLY SIMPLE. make tank shots projectile, not hitscan. Siege tanks are powerful because they are hitscan. Because the engine allows only one unit to attack at a time (though on very short time intervals) and the siege tanks hit immediately, it gives the illusion of super-intelligent AI that smart target. In reality one siege tank fires and hits in the same intant, the next fires, and then when the target is killed, they move on to the next because they can't attack nothing. However, if the projectile doesn't hit by the time it's the next one's turn to fire, they can overkill. So making the shots projectiles; very fast, very near but not entirely immediate projectiles. That will make it so that siege tanks can overkill, but not so much that mech becomes useless. With a couple of tanks firing useless shots every volley, mech will be much more survivable but still potent enough to keep terran winning 50% of their games, which Blizzard interprets to mean balance. I'd actually like this change, since it might add another layer to TvT -- the raven's PDD would now work on tank projectiles too if this change were made.
I think if tanks fired projectiles (and thus could overkill), Zergs who 1a2a3a'ed their army into a tank line would still lose, but smart Zergs would be able to micro their way through it with skill (a good thing).
Also, keep in mind that siege tanks fire much faster than their counterparts in BW did -- I don't think that making tanks "dumber" would necessarily make Terrans underpowered (as probably many Terran players would fear, though in the early beta when nobody used tanks, Terrans still weren't pushovers either...).
|
United States47024 Posts
On August 05 2010 08:23 Toxigen wrote:
I'd actually like this change, since it might add another layer to TvT -- the raven's PDD would now work on tank projectiles too if this change were made.
I think if tanks fired projectiles (and thus could overkill), Zergs who 1a2a3a'ed their army into a tank line would still lose, but smart Zergs would be able to micro their way through it with skill (a good thing).
Also, keep in mind that siege tanks fire much faster than their counterparts in BW did -- I don't think that making tanks "dumber" would necessarily make Terrans underpowered (as probably many Terran players would fear, though in the early beta when nobody used tanks, Terrans still weren't pushovers either...).
It would also make dodging tank fire possible through blink or transport micro like in SC1. Which is always cool.
And strictly speaking, the disadvantages of overkill are reduced if a player spreads and staggers his tanks. Overall, it would just promote better play--seeing as in its current state, sloppily sieging tanks in a ball doesn't punish Terran as hard as it should.
|
On August 05 2010 03:52 Grimjim wrote:
Marauder - Yes, and it doubles its damage.
Dear sir or madame,
Two marines do more damage to an armored target than one marauder. Two marines do twice as much damage to a non armored target than one marauder. I would hardly call the marauder damage bonus a "bonus." It is really just a penalty to shooting anything that is not armored.
Arbitrarily giving each race the same amount of ______ (in this case damage specialists) does not a balanced game make.
|
I do think zerg needs something but bonus damage is definitely not it, perhaps a specialized anti armor tier two unit? or maybe an increase in supply cap...
|
On August 05 2010 03:52 Grimjim wrote:
Greetings. Long time Zerg player, Diamond, blah blah blah.
Let's get the nasty stuff out of the way first: ZvT sucks. Zerg has paltry options compared to Terran, they cannot attack consistently until lategame, they are harassed to no end, etc. Maybe the problem lies with the units?
As we all know, Starcraft ll has the bonus damage system. Let's observe which units Zerg have that deal bonus damage, and which ones Terran have.
Zerglings - Nope
Baneling - Yes! The only unit before Tier 2 that does!
Roach - Nope
Hydralisk - Nope
Mutalisk - Nope
Queen - Nope
Corrupter - Yes! SUCCESS! It only took 2 bases and 12 minutes to get to a solely AA unit! Oh wait, but it's only vs. Massive.
Brood Lord - Nope
Ultralisk - Yes! Vs. Armored too!
So, 3/9, (fixed) and I didn't count the Infestor because it has no attack.
Marine - Nay
Marauder - Yes, and it doubles its damage.
Siege Tank - When unsieged, yes, and it attacks incredibly quickly.
Reaper - Yes, vs Light AND vs. Buildings
Hellions - Yes, and with an upgrade, deal insane amounts of damage to Light.
Ghost - Yes, and has an ability that will deal massive amounts of damage to any unit for only 25 energy.
Viking - Yes, but only in the air.
Banshee - Nay
Battlecruiser - Nay
Thor - Nay, and thankfully too. It doesn't even need it.
So, for Terran we have 6/10. Wow, that's over HALF, and three times the amount of Zerg. Also, every single unit that does have bonus damage can attack ground in some way.
Just for fun, let's do Protoss too:
Zealot - Nay
Stalker - Yes, vs. armored.
Sentry - Nay
Immortal - Yes, and it more than doubles its damage.
Pheonix - Yes
Void Ray - Yes
Carrier - Nay
Collosus - Nay
Dark Templar - Nay
Mothership - Nay
4/10 That's not bad, for its only a little higher than the units Zerg has, and three of those can attack ground armies. But thankfully this only factors into PvZ the right amount, as that matchup is very close to balanced and fun to play.
Maybe the reason Zerg has such awful early and mid-game defense is because every unit they have can be countered by a Tier 1 or Tier 2 unit from both of the other races, while providing only one unit that can counter back, and only against light units. Hell, the only + armored unit they have is Tier 3, and getting a decent number out is half the battle in itself.
Discuss.
Bonus dmg has nothing to do with game balance all zerg bous dmg is toss in as normal dmg due to the fact you have very few units and are the massing race. Giving them bonus dmg would just hurt zerg not help cause you would need to take away the normal dmg to add to armor or light or w/e.
|
On August 05 2010 09:44 xnub wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 03:52 Grimjim wrote:
Greetings. Long time Zerg player, Diamond, blah blah blah.
Let's get the nasty stuff out of the way first: ZvT sucks. Zerg has paltry options compared to Terran, they cannot attack consistently until lategame, they are harassed to no end, etc. Maybe the problem lies with the units?
As we all know, Starcraft ll has the bonus damage system. Let's observe which units Zerg have that deal bonus damage, and which ones Terran have.
Zerglings - Nope
Baneling - Yes! The only unit before Tier 2 that does!
Roach - Nope
Hydralisk - Nope
Mutalisk - Nope
Queen - Nope
Corrupter - Yes! SUCCESS! It only took 2 bases and 12 minutes to get to a solely AA unit! Oh wait, but it's only vs. Massive.
Brood Lord - Nope
Ultralisk - Yes! Vs. Armored too!
So, 3/9, (fixed) and I didn't count the Infestor because it has no attack.
Marine - Nay
Marauder - Yes, and it doubles its damage.
Siege Tank - When unsieged, yes, and it attacks incredibly quickly.
Reaper - Yes, vs Light AND vs. Buildings
Hellions - Yes, and with an upgrade, deal insane amounts of damage to Light.
Ghost - Yes, and has an ability that will deal massive amounts of damage to any unit for only 25 energy.
Viking - Yes, but only in the air.
Banshee - Nay
Battlecruiser - Nay
Thor - Nay, and thankfully too. It doesn't even need it.
So, for Terran we have 6/10. Wow, that's over HALF, and three times the amount of Zerg. Also, every single unit that does have bonus damage can attack ground in some way.
Just for fun, let's do Protoss too:
Zealot - Nay
Stalker - Yes, vs. armored.
Sentry - Nay
Immortal - Yes, and it more than doubles its damage.
Pheonix - Yes
Void Ray - Yes
Carrier - Nay
Collosus - Nay
Dark Templar - Nay
Mothership - Nay
4/10 That's not bad, for its only a little higher than the units Zerg has, and three of those can attack ground armies. But thankfully this only factors into PvZ the right amount, as that matchup is very close to balanced and fun to play.
Maybe the reason Zerg has such awful early and mid-game defense is because every unit they have can be countered by a Tier 1 or Tier 2 unit from both of the other races, while providing only one unit that can counter back, and only against light units. Hell, the only + armored unit they have is Tier 3, and getting a decent number out is half the battle in itself.
Discuss.
Bonus dmg has nothing to do with game balance all zerg bous dmg is toss in as normal dmg due to the fact you have very few units and are the massing race. Giving them bonus dmg would just hurt zerg not help cause you would need to take away the normal dmg to add to armor or light or w/e.
But look at the charts of dps per population value. How could Zerg be a "massing race" with literally no units aside from Zerglings that could be massed, and we have lower DPS per population AND lower DPS per resource value AND lower scaling with upgrades, than Terran?
Not even including the bonus damage, we need to out-mass them to only have a chance to cut even, not to have an advantage, while they have an advantage in efficiency (power per resource value), power per population, quicker late game tech, bonus damage on top of their efficiency, and higher scaling with upgrades, and Zerg has to put much more resources in to drones, has a much higher population of drones than the other races to cut even, and no real massable units aside from Lings.
That's the issue.
|
If the point of Zerg is to sacrifice their 200/200 army and recreate another in seconds, how are they expected to GET to that point if they are rolled by a Terran ball of +bonus damage dealers 8 minutes into the game while they are trying to pump Drones to stay ON PAR with the Terran player late-game? Or while being harassed with Banshees, Hellions, Reapers, Tank drops, Thor drops?
It seems every Terran simply says "Get 200/200, and sacrifice into Terran army and recreate". Yeah, that's a really great idea. Now how the **** do I get that far?
|
Mid-argument yesterday I decided to stop posting...just stepped back and read all the defensive Terran's. The nerf is coming. It's coming. And when it does, all the Terran's farming Zergs and other bad Terran players are gonig to drop a league. Their tears will blot out the sun.
There's really no point to any of these threads. For whatever reason, Terran players have convinced themselves that if they argue irrational points hard enough, things will reamin unchanged. I refuse to beleive there is a Diamond level Terran player who doesn't think the TvZ matchup is imbalanced. Thus, everything written by top Terran players just sounds unimaginably silly.
|
I've been thinking lately that it'd sure be nice if zerglings got +1 and +1 vs armored per upgrade. That'd make them quite a bit more effective against marauders, stalkers, and thors, all of which they are supposed to counter. Been finding that lings vs thors is pretty poor especially.
|
On August 05 2010 22:27 Graven wrote:
Mid-argument yesterday I decided to stop posting...just stepped back and read all the defensive Terran's. The nerf is coming. It's coming. And when it does, all the Terran's farming Zergs and other bad Terran players are gonig to drop a league. Their tears will blot out the sun.
There's really no point to any of these threads. For whatever reason, Terran players have convinced themselves that if they argue irrational points hard enough, things will reamin unchanged. I refuse to beleive there is a Diamond level Terran player who doesn't think the TvZ matchup is imbalanced. Thus, everything written by top Terran players just sounds unimaginably silly.
Really, this is the kind of shit that destroyed WoW. One class whines about so and so class and that class gets nerfed. The nerfed class keeps whining that their class is now underpowered and x class is OP. X class gets nerfed. The SC2 strategy and general forums on TL are slowly devolving into a Bnet forum like state with people constantly whining about this and that.
|
On August 05 2010 04:32 Grimjim wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 04:19 Philip2110 wrote:
Pretty sure lack of bonus damage has nothing to do with balance of the game
This, whats your point OP Oh, lack of bonus damage has nothing to do with the balance? Then let's take it all out then. Let's see how that changes things. What a dumb argument. Do I really have to elaborate?
|
Okay, nobody seems to be mentioning this.
The reason bonus damage is so helpful is not against units, it's against buildings!!!! It's much harder for zerg to bust a front of a base because there's no front-busters (bonus to armored or longer range) until tier 3 except the banelings which only have a very early window to be effective basically making baneling busts all-in.
I think it's one of those things that is really hard to understand from a balance point of view. What if I made probes do 3 damage instead of 5, I don't think it would effect win percentage all that much, but it would be imbalanced. I think imbalanced has become too synonymous with broken. I think strategies like mech and 4-gate push would be tougher to execute if zerg had more ways of applying early pressure. Right zerg early-pressure is too all-in.
|
IMO, as Z you're not supposed to mass units and charge into the T ball.. you have to use other tactics.. its like fast guerilla warfare versus a slow, high tech army. Remember who won the vietnam war? 
Its pointless to argue about "this unit counters this unit" when the game isn't designed around units, but rather around playstyles.
|
Regarding bonus damage it seems like this is kind of similar to brood war.
Terran units that got bonus damage, or rather damage penalties...
firebat, ghost, vulture, siege tank
Protoss
Dragoon... Corsair? Not sure about corsair.
Zerg:
afaik they have no penalties. Feel free to correct me.
My biggest complaint right now is that zerg hasn't come up with any early game pressure that's not an all-in push. It'd be cool if ventral sacs could be moved to hatchery tech. That'd open up a lot more options but would be pretty easy for any other race to counter.
Tanks also take way more skill to defeat than they do to use.. But oh well i can deal with that until they figure something out.
|
If anything this makes zerg better
I don't really consider bonus damage to be bonus damage, but rather normal damage vs nerfed damage
|
Isn't is a benefit that Zerg does not have bonus damage? Having bonus damage does not mean that you will do more damage, it just means that your damage will be something like 10+4 instead of 14. Without bonus damage, Zerg only has to focus on building units that the opponent do not have bonus damage against. Terran and Protoss have to build units that have the bonus damage vs enemy units while avoiding the enemy's bonus damage.
|
I think of them more as damage penalties. If your Immortals, Marauders, Void Rays etc. are shooting Zerglings, they're pretty worthless. Whereas it doesn't make a damned bit of difference what Hydras are shooting at. They absolutely rape everything.
Its rather ingenious, because it means Zerg don't have to micro their army and can spend more time macro'ing. Protoss and Terran have to micro a ton more to get the most out of their army.
|
doesnt make much of a difference each race is different
zerg can tech switch so fast i dont see why youre complaining
eg zerg mass hydras, toss goes chargelot colossus, zerg masses corrupters, gg toss cant get enough stalkers out in time
toss can complain about having shit anti air but ill leave that to another day
|
Lol of course Zerg doesn't get that many specialist units. It's because all their units come from the same building. If it had such units the other races wouldn't be able to cope with the sudden tech switches.
Obvious stuff is obvious 
|
Calgary25974 Posts
Ugh, everything doesn't have to be the same.......
|
Bonuses add diversity not power.
Also if you look at BroodWar the Zerg had few (hydra & devourer) concussive/explosive attacks (which is like the same thing as bonuses)
compare that to Terran which had Vultures, Firebats, Tanks, Ghosts, wraiths, Goliaths, Valkyries, who all had some kind of explosive/concussive (bonus) damage.
2 v 7? That is even worse than SCII 3v6. Yet it was balanced.
|
i would gladly give Protoss's bonus dmg for flat values :o
immortal from 20+30 to what? 35-40 to everything? any time!
|
I don't get this complaining. Bonus damage is just a selective nerf. Just imagine if infernal preigniter modified normal damage instead of bonus. You would be complaining (and rightfully so) about that OP hellion needing to do less damage to everything. With the it added to bonus though they are manageable.
|
On August 06 2010 02:15 Zack1900 wrote:
I don't get this complaining. Bonus damage is just a selective nerf. Just imagine if infernal preigniter modified normal damage instead of bonus. You would be complaining (and rightfully so) about that OP hellion needing to do less damage to everything. With the it added to bonus though they are manageable.
It seems people are ignoring the damage charts that were linked, and asking "whats the problem?".
Look at the charts, and you will see that WITHOUT the bonuses considered, Terran has higher power per resource value, and higher power per population, across the board. When you consider the bonuses, it's just rediculous.
Do the math. Lings are the only unit that is valuable in the 2 areas mentioned, and they are not too viable vs a full Terran army composition do to their huge range, tanks, and how fast stimmed bio mows them down before they reach them.
A Roach only has 40% of the potential of an UNSTIMMED marine per population. Sure, you can make another wave of them, but are you going to be able to make 2.5 waves to the Terrans 1? No.... It doesnt work like that. Hydras only have 70% of the potential of an unstimmed Marine. STIMMED marines are equivalent to nearly 3 Hydras.
We sink in MANY more resources just to have an army that is not possibly equialent even with higher population than Terran.
Marines, Reapers, Marauders, and Thors are ALL more valuable per resource value AND supply/population value than all Zerg units aside from Lings - which already mentioned could not even get close to mixed armies at the mid to late game. That's not even factoring how devestating Tanks can be.
The only way for a varied Zerg army to be equivalent in terms of power is to have 2.5-3 times as many units, which is just not possible. Typically if you pull ahead on economy you will still be at most a few dozen ahead on population.
So it makes the argument of "Well Zerg can jsut make another wave after they die" a bad one. It's not possible to make 3 full attack waves of units before they get in to your base, and that's what they need to do to defeat Terrans units WITHOUT their attack bonuses.
Just think how bad the situation is if you start considering their attack bonuses, and the fact that they can also keep producing units to back up their army while you remake each wave?
On the claims of "bonus damage being a selective nerf" - This is only true if their damage is comparable without having bonus damage. When Stim Marines do 20.9 focus fire damage per mineral value, Marauders on NON ARMORED TARGETS do 10.6, and Hydras only do 9, how is that a selective nerf? The truth is, it's a selective BUFF because Mara even do more focus damage against light targets.
|
Well.. The whole "counter" thing is pretty annoying imo
in sc1 you can do any unit combination if you can just do it correctly..
sc2 u have to make the right unit combinations because of the whole +damage which is annoying because its so hard to scout terran.
feels like in sc1 the reduced damage was to balance it
and in sc2 its to extra damage to make it so unit combinations counter others, which already happens without the extra damage.
|
Is it really zerg is lacking bonus damage or is everyone else lacking consistant damage?
|
On August 05 2010 23:33 ZeaL. wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 22:27 Graven wrote:
Mid-argument yesterday I decided to stop posting...just stepped back and read all the defensive Terran's. The nerf is coming. It's coming. And when it does, all the Terran's farming Zergs and other bad Terran players are gonig to drop a league. Their tears will blot out the sun.
There's really no point to any of these threads. For whatever reason, Terran players have convinced themselves that if they argue irrational points hard enough, things will reamin unchanged. I refuse to beleive there is a Diamond level Terran player who doesn't think the TvZ matchup is imbalanced. Thus, everything written by top Terran players just sounds unimaginably silly. Really, this is the kind of shit that destroyed WoW.
I stopped reading there. U mad?
|
On August 06 2010 04:25 Spyridon wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2010 02:15 Zack1900 wrote:
I don't get this complaining. Bonus damage is just a selective nerf. Just imagine if infernal preigniter modified normal damage instead of bonus. You would be complaining (and rightfully so) about that OP hellion needing to do less damage to everything. With the it added to bonus though they are manageable. It seems people are ignoring the damage charts that were linked, and asking "whats the problem?". Look at the charts, and you will see that WITHOUT the bonuses considered, Terran has higher power per resource value, and higher power per population, across the board. When you consider the bonuses, it's just rediculous. Do the math. Lings are the only unit that is valuable in the 2 areas mentioned, and they are not too viable vs a full Terran army composition do to their huge range, tanks, and how fast stimmed bio mows them down before they reach them. A Roach only has 40% of the potential of an UNSTIMMED marine per population. Sure, you can make another wave of them, but are you going to be able to make 2.5 waves to the Terrans 1? No.... It doesnt work like that. Hydras only have 70% of the potential of an unstimmed Marine. STIMMED marines are equivalent to nearly 3 Hydras. We sink in MANY more resources just to have an army that is not possibly equialent even with higher population than Terran. Marines, Reapers, Marauders, and Thors are ALL more valuable per resource value AND supply/population value than all Zerg units aside from Lings - which already mentioned could not even get close to mixed armies at the mid to late game. That's not even factoring how devestating Tanks can be. The only way for a varied Zerg army to be equivalent in terms of power is to have 2.5-3 times as many units, which is just not possible. Typically if you pull ahead on economy you will still be at most a few dozen ahead on population. So it makes the argument of "Well Zerg can jsut make another wave after they die" a bad one. It's not possible to make 3 full attack waves of units before they get in to your base, and that's what they need to do to defeat Terrans units WITHOUT their attack bonuses. Just think how bad the situation is if you start considering their attack bonuses, and the fact that they can also keep producing units to back up their army while you remake each wave? On the claims of "bonus damage being a selective nerf" - This is only true if their damage is comparable without having bonus damage. When Stim Marines do 20.9 focus fire damage per mineral value, Marauders on NON ARMORED TARGETS do 10.6, and Hydras only do 9, how is that a selective nerf? The truth is, it's a selective BUFF because Mara even do more focus damage against light targets.
I await a response to this post that doesn't make me face palm. I can't fathom the argument someone will make, but I don't doubt one will exist.
|
I think that it is really hard for any of us to claim imbalances in the game.
The only way to know for sure if something is or is not balanced is with data. Statistics.
Only looking at win/loss ratio of every race in every league to know if it is imbalanced in some way.
Saying: "zerg units do not have bonus damage, terran does, so it's imbalanced" it's the same thing as comparing one unit to another without observing the context.
I am also tired of these threads. I think we should be trying to came up with solutions with the game as is. "Are you dying making roaches?" do banelings. "Dying making banelings?" Try something different.
Asking for changes as we think would be best won't do anything.
|
On August 06 2010 04:45 Graven wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2010 04:25 Spyridon wrote:On August 06 2010 02:15 Zack1900 wrote:
I don't get this complaining. Bonus damage is just a selective nerf. Just imagine if infernal preigniter modified normal damage instead of bonus. You would be complaining (and rightfully so) about that OP hellion needing to do less damage to everything. With the it added to bonus though they are manageable. It seems people are ignoring the damage charts that were linked, and asking "whats the problem?". Look at the charts, and you will see that WITHOUT the bonuses considered, Terran has higher power per resource value, and higher power per population, across the board. When you consider the bonuses, it's just rediculous. Do the math. Lings are the only unit that is valuable in the 2 areas mentioned, and they are not too viable vs a full Terran army composition do to their huge range, tanks, and how fast stimmed bio mows them down before they reach them. A Roach only has 40% of the potential of an UNSTIMMED marine per population. Sure, you can make another wave of them, but are you going to be able to make 2.5 waves to the Terrans 1? No.... It doesnt work like that. Hydras only have 70% of the potential of an unstimmed Marine. STIMMED marines are equivalent to nearly 3 Hydras. We sink in MANY more resources just to have an army that is not possibly equialent even with higher population than Terran. Marines, Reapers, Marauders, and Thors are ALL more valuable per resource value AND supply/population value than all Zerg units aside from Lings - which already mentioned could not even get close to mixed armies at the mid to late game. That's not even factoring how devestating Tanks can be. The only way for a varied Zerg army to be equivalent in terms of power is to have 2.5-3 times as many units, which is just not possible. Typically if you pull ahead on economy you will still be at most a few dozen ahead on population. So it makes the argument of "Well Zerg can jsut make another wave after they die" a bad one. It's not possible to make 3 full attack waves of units before they get in to your base, and that's what they need to do to defeat Terrans units WITHOUT their attack bonuses. Just think how bad the situation is if you start considering their attack bonuses, and the fact that they can also keep producing units to back up their army while you remake each wave? On the claims of "bonus damage being a selective nerf" - This is only true if their damage is comparable without having bonus damage. When Stim Marines do 20.9 focus fire damage per mineral value, Marauders on NON ARMORED TARGETS do 10.6, and Hydras only do 9, how is that a selective nerf? The truth is, it's a selective BUFF because Mara even do more focus damage against light targets. I await a response to this post that doesn't make me face palm. I can't fathom the argument someone will make, but I don't doubt one will exist.
You're an idiot.
You keep talking about Bonus Damage like it's some kind of free handout and Zerg got stuck last in line at the giveaway. It's not. Units weren't designed around their normal damage and then given another +X vs armored just for giggles.
Without its bonuses, a Marauder puts out less damage than a single Marine. Part of why people don't like Corruptors is because so much of their damage is put into an obscure bonus. Stalkers were considered bad in the first half of the Beta because they had terrible normal damage and couldn't deal with Mutas (and generally just sucked vs anything non-armored), so Blizzard weighted them a bit more towards normal damage and everyone was happy even though they lost their extra +1 from upgrades. Terran Missile Turrets were considered problematic in Beta when they did 7+7 vs Armored because they were awful against light units like Mutas and Phoenixes, so they where switched to 12 raw damage, and again, everyone was happy even though this meant they did less damage vs armored.
I'm not saying Zerg is fine, but pointing at bonus damage like it's free money and saying "THAT'S THE PROBLEM!" isn't a compelling argument, and getting condescending about it just makes you look like a discredit to the species.
|
Banelings does insane damage vs Light ground units so thats a fair reason, and Zerg are all mass units so with bonus damage it would be too strong.
Zerg is strong right now except against mech as they have no way to tackle tanks effectively.
|
these threads are so dumb, might aswell start one complaining how imba it is that apples are bigger than peaches.
|
OP forgot that spine crawlers do +5 bonus dmg. vs armored.
That is besides the point that if a unit does all the dmg it needs in order for it to be balanced, there is no need for it to instead do less dmg, but with bonus dmg too.
|
OK, I think we need to have an intervention here: Zerg are not UP, terran are not OP. People, please. There hasn't even been a second patch, the game has barely been out a week, and everyones complaining, if you think zerg is bad, switch races. NO one is making you play the icky bugs, and if you're complaining because you want ridiculous buffs, then you're just whining because you're bad.
Zerg is not UP, 5 of the top ten players are zerg right now, if you can't beat mech, then practice, and stop coming here and whining about everything. I swear, every third thread nowadays is about ZvT: ATTENTION ZERG PLAYERS: MEET A TERRAN FRIEND AND PRACTIVE AGAINST MECH. I'm tired of these PMSey rants, it's gone on long enough. I'm sorry to have be the one who tells you this.
|
United States47024 Posts
On August 06 2010 01:42 yeti wrote:
Bonuses add diversity not power.
Also if you look at BroodWar the Zerg had few (hydra & devourer) concussive/explosive attacks (which is like the same thing as bonuses)
compare that to Terran which had Vultures, Firebats, Tanks, Ghosts, wraiths, Goliaths, Valkyries, who all had some kind of explosive/concussive (bonus) damage.
2 v 7? That is even worse than SCII 3v6. Yet it was balanced.
This.
You could make all the units do normal damage, and you could balance it just fine. It would just be boring.
On August 06 2010 04:25 Spyridon wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2010 02:15 Zack1900 wrote:
I don't get this complaining. Bonus damage is just a selective nerf. Just imagine if infernal preigniter modified normal damage instead of bonus. You would be complaining (and rightfully so) about that OP hellion needing to do less damage to everything. With the it added to bonus though they are manageable. It seems people are ignoring the damage charts that were linked, and asking "whats the problem?". Look at the charts, and you will see that WITHOUT the bonuses considered, Terran has higher power per resource value, and higher power per population, across the board. When you consider the bonuses, it's just rediculous. Do the math. Lings are the only unit that is valuable in the 2 areas mentioned, and they are not too viable vs a full Terran army composition do to their huge range, tanks, and how fast stimmed bio mows them down before they reach them. A Roach only has 40% of the potential of an UNSTIMMED marine per population. Sure, you can make another wave of them, but are you going to be able to make 2.5 waves to the Terrans 1? No.... It doesnt work like that. Hydras only have 70% of the potential of an unstimmed Marine. STIMMED marines are equivalent to nearly 3 Hydras. We sink in MANY more resources just to have an army that is not possibly equialent even with higher population than Terran. Marines, Reapers, Marauders, and Thors are ALL more valuable per resource value AND supply/population value than all Zerg units aside from Lings - which already mentioned could not even get close to mixed armies at the mid to late game. That's not even factoring how devestating Tanks can be. The only way for a varied Zerg army to be equivalent in terms of power is to have 2.5-3 times as many units, which is just not possible. Typically if you pull ahead on economy you will still be at most a few dozen ahead on population. So it makes the argument of "Well Zerg can jsut make another wave after they die" a bad one. It's not possible to make 3 full attack waves of units before they get in to your base, and that's what they need to do to defeat Terrans units WITHOUT their attack bonuses. Just think how bad the situation is if you start considering their attack bonuses, and the fact that they can also keep producing units to back up their army while you remake each wave? On the claims of "bonus damage being a selective nerf" - This is only true if their damage is comparable without having bonus damage. When Stim Marines do 20.9 focus fire damage per mineral value, Marauders on NON ARMORED TARGETS do 10.6, and Hydras only do 9, how is that a selective nerf? The truth is, it's a selective BUFF because Mara even do more focus damage against light targets.
Even if zerg has relatively poor damage, this means zerg needs an across-the-board damage buff. It doesn't mean you need to start giving them bonus damage. You can achieve balance without sacrificing unit diversity.
|
On August 06 2010 05:40 koOma wrote:
these threads are so dumb, might aswell start one complaining how imba it is that apples are bigger than peaches.
Apples are imbalanced. Nerf Apples.
|
btw thor has bonus dmg. +aoe and + dmg to light. no?
|
On August 06 2010 01:22 JaspluR wrote:
doesnt make much of a difference each race is different
zerg can tech switch so fast i dont see why youre complaining
eg zerg mass hydras, toss goes chargelot colossus, zerg masses corrupters, gg toss cant get enough stalkers out in time
toss can complain about having shit anti air but ill leave that to another day
your argument doesnt even make sense. zealot/collosus -> stalker isnt something hard to pull. you have warpgates that instantly warp in units????? corruptors also cant even attack ground so i dont know why this is an issue. sounds like you just have problems with scouting to me.
|
On August 05 2010 04:05 Saracen wrote:
I'm a Zerg player and even I'm getting sick of these Zerg UP, Terran OP threads... Thanks for the info, though, OP.
Haha two acronyms with the same letters but different meanings! Also, my experinece with zerg is that I have so many units the bonus damage really doesn't matter. The idea I always enjoy is keeping the enemy scared and in their base while you eco/tech as hard as possible, when they come out they're faced with a well-fed zerg army, with all the right tools to fight with.
|
This whole topic is stupid. In no way has this changed from broodwar. Sc2 uses lower attack damages that get buffed when fighting some units compared to broodwars all units do high damage but its gets reduced verus some units. (ghost hit light 10, medium 5, heavy 2.5).
Also if you look at BroodWar the Zerg had few (hydra & devourer) concussive/explosive attacks (which is like the same thing as bonuses)
compare that to Terran which had Vultures, Firebats, Tanks, Ghosts, wraiths, Goliaths, Valkyries, who all had some kind of explosive/concussive (bonus) damage.
2 v 7? That is even worse than SCII 3v6. Yet it was balanced. An excellent point showing that even if the numbers arnt all the same the game can be balanced. Like who really wants a game that is all the same anyway?
|
I dont see why everyone here thinks that having bonus damage is such a big boost, such a great thing.
Imagine for a moment for example that sieged tanks did 30 (+30 armored) damage instead of doing 50 damage per shot.
Would that be good for terran? Not at all, having bonus damage there would be really bad.
If marauders did 15 damage instead of 10(+10), then what? They would be a little less efficient against buildings, and roaches, but would kill workers, lings, queens, and hydras 50% faster.
What if hydras did 8(+8 light) instead of just doing 12? Would that be a super awesome zerg buff? lol
|
On August 06 2010 07:33 silencesc wrote:
OK, I think we need to have an intervention here: Zerg are not UP, terran are not OP. People, please. There hasn't even been a second patch, the game has barely been out a week, and everyones complaining, if you think zerg is bad, switch races. NO one is making you play the icky bugs, and if you're complaining because you want ridiculous buffs, then you're just whining because you're bad.
Zerg is not UP, 5 of the top ten players are zerg right now, if you can't beat mech, then practice, and stop coming here and whining about everything. I swear, every third thread nowadays is about ZvT: ATTENTION ZERG PLAYERS: MEET A TERRAN FRIEND AND PRACTIVE AGAINST MECH. I'm tired of these PMSey rants, it's gone on long enough. I'm sorry to have be the one who tells you this.
You clearly have no clue of what you are talking about.
I am seriously speechless.
|
The original post is proof that you can have no understanding of this game whatsoever and still make it to diamond league.
|
On August 06 2010 08:31 MICHELLE wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2010 07:33 silencesc wrote:
OK, I think we need to have an intervention here: Zerg are not UP, terran are not OP. People, please. There hasn't even been a second patch, the game has barely been out a week, and everyones complaining, if you think zerg is bad, switch races. NO one is making you play the icky bugs, and if you're complaining because you want ridiculous buffs, then you're just whining because you're bad.
Zerg is not UP, 5 of the top ten players are zerg right now, if you can't beat mech, then practice, and stop coming here and whining about everything. I swear, every third thread nowadays is about ZvT: ATTENTION ZERG PLAYERS: MEET A TERRAN FRIEND AND PRACTIVE AGAINST MECH. I'm tired of these PMSey rants, it's gone on long enough. I'm sorry to have be the one who tells you this. You clearly have no clue of what you are talking about. I am seriously speechless.
Now I'm confused. Why am I clueless? Literally every other thread now is OMG OMG ZERG SUCKS NERF TERRAN. It's obnoxious, and people need to stop and suck it up.
|
What about comparing the other unit upgrades?
Zergling speed - Yes.
Zergling attack - Yes
Roach speed - Yes
Roach move while borrowed - Yes
Ability to remove all damage unless a detector is around - Yes
|
Why not just have zerg either have a higher supply cap or lower one or two of their attacking units' supply cost. I'm not the best player (mid/high gold) but I think that'd be one solution instead of messing with the attack values.
|
On August 06 2010 07:43 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2010 01:42 yeti wrote:
Bonuses add diversity not power.
Also if you look at BroodWar the Zerg had few (hydra & devourer) concussive/explosive attacks (which is like the same thing as bonuses)
compare that to Terran which had Vultures, Firebats, Tanks, Ghosts, wraiths, Goliaths, Valkyries, who all had some kind of explosive/concussive (bonus) damage.
2 v 7? That is even worse than SCII 3v6. Yet it was balanced. This. You could make all the units do normal damage, and you could balance it just fine. It would just be boring. Show nested quote +On August 06 2010 04:25 Spyridon wrote:On August 06 2010 02:15 Zack1900 wrote:
I don't get this complaining. Bonus damage is just a selective nerf. Just imagine if infernal preigniter modified normal damage instead of bonus. You would be complaining (and rightfully so) about that OP hellion needing to do less damage to everything. With the it added to bonus though they are manageable. It seems people are ignoring the damage charts that were linked, and asking "whats the problem?". Look at the charts, and you will see that WITHOUT the bonuses considered, Terran has higher power per resource value, and higher power per population, across the board. When you consider the bonuses, it's just rediculous. Do the math. Lings are the only unit that is valuable in the 2 areas mentioned, and they are not too viable vs a full Terran army composition do to their huge range, tanks, and how fast stimmed bio mows them down before they reach them. A Roach only has 40% of the potential of an UNSTIMMED marine per population. Sure, you can make another wave of them, but are you going to be able to make 2.5 waves to the Terrans 1? No.... It doesnt work like that. Hydras only have 70% of the potential of an unstimmed Marine. STIMMED marines are equivalent to nearly 3 Hydras. We sink in MANY more resources just to have an army that is not possibly equialent even with higher population than Terran. Marines, Reapers, Marauders, and Thors are ALL more valuable per resource value AND supply/population value than all Zerg units aside from Lings - which already mentioned could not even get close to mixed armies at the mid to late game. That's not even factoring how devestating Tanks can be. The only way for a varied Zerg army to be equivalent in terms of power is to have 2.5-3 times as many units, which is just not possible. Typically if you pull ahead on economy you will still be at most a few dozen ahead on population. So it makes the argument of "Well Zerg can jsut make another wave after they die" a bad one. It's not possible to make 3 full attack waves of units before they get in to your base, and that's what they need to do to defeat Terrans units WITHOUT their attack bonuses. Just think how bad the situation is if you start considering their attack bonuses, and the fact that they can also keep producing units to back up their army while you remake each wave? On the claims of "bonus damage being a selective nerf" - This is only true if their damage is comparable without having bonus damage. When Stim Marines do 20.9 focus fire damage per mineral value, Marauders on NON ARMORED TARGETS do 10.6, and Hydras only do 9, how is that a selective nerf? The truth is, it's a selective BUFF because Mara even do more focus damage against light targets. Even if zerg has relatively poor damage, this means zerg needs an across-the-board damage buff. It doesn't mean you need to start giving them bonus damage. You can achieve balance without sacrificing unit diversity.
My only point was that saying it's a "bonus" is not neccessarily true, especially if the damage is sub par without even including the bonuses.
That said, it may not even be the damage that needs a nerf, as the only match with issues is ZvT for the most part, and only with certain unit mix's. Damage buff across the board would mess up the balance, the dynamics from ZvT likely need to change though, and it's fairly agreed upon even by top Zerg players.
The way the units match up makes ZvT far more difficult than any other match up - the mix of needing to utilize every unit type to counter a few, several more key timing vulnerabilities, lack of upgradability, and just the clash of dynamics (Zerg being based upon having weaker units with less power but larger numbers, going against Terran which is designed to be insanely mineral and population efficient with extraordinary range and incredible AoE damage - this means Zerg get mowed down before even doing the damage needed to the redicuously efficient army)
This could be fixed in many ways - be it damage tweaks, spell ability tweaks, even a new or moved upgrades. I'll leave it up to Blizzard to figure out how.
Fact of the matter is, you will be hard-pressed to find a decently ranked Zerg player that is skilled in each match up, that will not openly admit that Terran is by far more difficult than the other match ups. That's not to mention the silliness of ZvZ, but take in to consideration that even though ZvZ is completely retarded at times, it's nowhere near as painful as ZvT.
That should say something.
On August 06 2010 08:37 silencesc wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2010 08:31 MICHELLE wrote:On August 06 2010 07:33 silencesc wrote:
OK, I think we need to have an intervention here: Zerg are not UP, terran are not OP. People, please. There hasn't even been a second patch, the game has barely been out a week, and everyones complaining, if you think zerg is bad, switch races. NO one is making you play the icky bugs, and if you're complaining because you want ridiculous buffs, then you're just whining because you're bad.
Zerg is not UP, 5 of the top ten players are zerg right now, if you can't beat mech, then practice, and stop coming here and whining about everything. I swear, every third thread nowadays is about ZvT: ATTENTION ZERG PLAYERS: MEET A TERRAN FRIEND AND PRACTIVE AGAINST MECH. I'm tired of these PMSey rants, it's gone on long enough. I'm sorry to have be the one who tells you this. You clearly have no clue of what you are talking about. I am seriously speechless. Now I'm confused. Why am I clueless? Literally every other thread now is OMG OMG ZERG SUCKS NERF TERRAN. It's obnoxious, and people need to stop and suck it up.
As just mentioned... in balance would mean the racial match-ups are at least somewhat balanced. If its pretty much unanimously agreed by even Pros that ZvT is redicuously harder than the other matches... how could you say there is not a problem?
|
I'm actually getting scared that we're going to lose race-gameplay diversity because everyone wants what the other people have..
|
isnt hydralisk get bonus against armoured?
|
On August 06 2010 11:22 IndecisivePenguin wrote:
I'm actually getting scared that we're going to lose race-gameplay diversity because everyone wants what the other people have..
I dont think anyone here wants what other people have.
All people want is the 3 racial match-ups to feel somewhat balanced, and it's plain as day by the polls that exist and the amount of topics such as this that ZvT is by far the one that needs to be addressed most.
|
Damn, the Terran players really come out of the wet-work to defend themselves quite vigorously.
If everything is so balanced and honky-dory, why are you all so keen on trying to prove that? If it's balanced, Blizzard won't do anything.
|
United States47024 Posts
On August 06 2010 13:01 Grimjim wrote:
Damn, the Terran players really come out of the wet-work to defend themselves quite vigorously.
If everything is so balanced and honky-dory, why are you all so keen on trying to prove that? If it's balanced, Blizzard won't do anything.
Half the people in this thread are insisting that it's not imbalanced. The other half are saying that you can fix the imbalance issue in a way that doesn't dilute Terran's racial identity.
|
On August 06 2010 13:01 Grimjim wrote:
Damn, the Terran players really come out of the wet-work to defend themselves quite vigorously.
If everything is so balanced and honky-dory, why are you all so keen on trying to prove that? If it's balanced, Blizzard won't do anything.
Because bad zergs like you make endless threads about pointless things that show you have no real understanding of the game at all.
Even IF ZvT is imbalanced, it's nowhere near as bad as all the bad zergs are making it out to be. Not even close.
It's also worth mentioning that TvP is imbalanced... but you don't see hordes of terran players making endless threads about it. (Why? Because no 'pro' player has complained like Idra/Artosis have. Ever think that they are incredibly biased AND whiney players?
Anyway. Hopefully Bliz will release race matchup data so that people can STFU about it. It's not going to be even close to the '90%' win rate that bad zergs are claiming.
|
On August 06 2010 13:06 oxxo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2010 13:01 Grimjim wrote:
Damn, the Terran players really come out of the wet-work to defend themselves quite vigorously.
If everything is so balanced and honky-dory, why are you all so keen on trying to prove that? If it's balanced, Blizzard won't do anything. Because bad zergs like you make endless threads about pointless things that show you have no real understanding of the game at all. Even IF ZvT is imbalanced, it's nowhere near as bad as all the bad zergs are making it out to be. Not even close. It's also worth mentioning that TvP is imbalanced... but you don't see hordes of terran players making endless threads about it. (Why? Because no 'pro' player has complained like Idra/Artosis have. Ever think that they are incredibly biased AND whiney players? Anyway. Hopefully Bliz will release race matchup data so that people can STFU about it. It's not going to be even close to the '90%' win rate that bad zergs are claiming.
My point is proven.
Find a way to balance it without getting rid of the diversity. Nowhere in the original post do I claim "Zerg is weak because it NEEDS more bonus damage units". I simply stated the facts, maybe asked if that was the reason the matchup leans how it does, and asked for other people's thoughts.
Oh, and mindlessly calling another player bad.
Let me ask you, are you a Zerg player?
|
|
|
*yawn* Expected. Terran won't like their nerf, so they are preparing for it early.
|
you missed archon, bonus to bio
|
You could whine that terran is overpowered (I play terran and kinda agree) but not that Zerg is underpowered. That's just a no
|
On August 06 2010 13:06 oxxo wrote:
...but you don't see hordes of terran players making endless threads about it. (Why? Because no 'pro' player has complained like Idra/Artosis have.)
wow. that was, omg.. by far... the most retarded thing i read today. thank u for making everyone who reads it dumber.
|
On August 05 2010 03:54 AyJay wrote:
Pretty sure lack of bonus damage has nothing to do with balance of the game
I disagree, in fact think it may be the biggest issue right now, but looking at it from a simple yes or no perspective is misleading. Yes an Immortal has a huge bonus damage but its regular damage is barely equal to a stimmed Marine. Stalker bonus damage is trivial. Marauder bonus damage is huge, with Stim they are doing approximately 250% the damage of a Stalker for half the gas. Hellion bonus damage is really high with the upgrade, factor in the splash damage and you have an extremely dangerous and very fast unit that requires no gas. Viking bonus damage while not huge is high enough to be a problem when coupled with their cheap cost, long range and ease to mass produce, not to mention the bonus applies to almost every unit they face. Reaper bonus damage is also really high but at least they are hard to mass in the portion of the game where they are hard to deal with.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
