EPTis what many have said , the more terran learn their units and new strats the more easy will start towin vs zerg lack of openings and unit selection .
Dimaga may switch to Terran - Page 43
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
st3roids
Greece538 Posts
is what many have said , the more terran learn their units and new strats the more easy will start towin vs zerg lack of openings and unit selection . | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
I'd actually be fine with capping larvae on the hatchery at around ~7 if it meant reducing ultrabuild time. I would actually consider it a buff. | ||
|
LeDuck
Germany152 Posts
On the other hand, the game is only out a few weeks and Blizzards wants to take their time, otherwise the balance is going to be even more screwd then before. I can somehow understand Dimaga, but it's going to suck if he changes, he is one of my favourite zerg players =/ | ||
|
GxZ
United States375 Posts
| ||
|
SlowBlink
United States102 Posts
On August 17 2010 02:56 GxZ wrote: Basically... playing ZvT is like playing the campaign... You have to hold two bases, while making spinecrawlers and units to hold off the attack until you can tech into ultra or bl and take a 3rd... Thanks you so much for this insightful strategy. This will help me so much in the days to come. | ||
|
EffectS
Belgium795 Posts
| ||
|
FlamingTurd
United States1059 Posts
| ||
|
Zato-1
Chile4253 Posts
On August 17 2010 02:27 Liquid`HayprO wrote: i think the maps are a bigger reasons to the success terrans are having atm. some maps are just autowins for terran. Which maps, and for which matchups? The only map I remember being horribly imbalanced was Incineration Zone, but that one's been out for a long time now. | ||
|
Marcury
Canada141 Posts
On August 17 2010 05:29 Zato-1 wrote: Which maps, and for which matchups? The only map I remember being horribly imbalanced was Incineration Zone, but that one's been out for a long time now. Lost temple TvX --> entrance makes it really really difficult to attack with siege tanks on ridge. In TvZ thor drop overlooking natural is a nightmare to deal with. Kulas Ravine --> Once again, so many ridges for tanks/reapers to abuse Delta Quadrant --> Both expansions can be tanked from ONE high ground To name a few. Many maps are also way too crowded IMO, lots of narrow chokes and not a lot of room to flank or out maneuver against the (supposed) immobile terran. | ||
|
shtdisturbance
Canada613 Posts
Why does every map have some sort of cliff or whole or other annoying artifact in the middle of the map? For example LT, lets just pretend that cliff above natural is not there because that is just ridiculous in itself. In the middle of the map when the T pushes i want to have flanks of baneling, zergling infestor, and what ever other unit i have chosen. Why is there 4 random things sticking out of the ground so that im funneled and my flank is pretty much useless cause i cant even surround... Python please. | ||
|
Zato-1
Chile4253 Posts
On August 17 2010 05:43 Marcury wrote: Lost temple TvX --> entrance makes it really really difficult to attack with siege tanks on ridge. In TvZ thor drop overlooking natural is a nightmare to deal with. This one makes a lot of sense. I haven't ever played against Terran in LT, but I can see the potential of that ledge plus tanks. Kulas, I don't quite agree. As Protoss at least, I've also been able to abuse the cliffs to harass the Terran right back, and there's so much space for me to expand to that granting Terrans control of a small chunk of the map isn't game breaking, IMO. As to Delta Quadrant, I've never played there, so nothing I can say. | ||
|
Pking
Sweden142 Posts
On August 17 2010 03:47 EffectS wrote: In top 100 according to SC2ranks.com there's 19 Zerg.... freaking 19 !! This is'nt as bad as it sounds as Zerg is the least popular race played. Looking at the top 5000 races in the different leagues, about 21-25% play Zerg. If the game was perfectly balanced, 21-25 out of top 100 would be Zerg. So that is not overwhelming signs of imbalance. | ||
|
Trok67
France384 Posts
On August 17 2010 06:15 Pking wrote: This is'nt as bad as it sounds as Zerg is the least popular race played. Looking at the top 5000 races in the different leagues, about 21-25% play Zerg. If the game was perfectly balanced, 21-25 out of top 100 would be Zerg. So that is not overwhelming signs of imbalance. No you can't say that. People play zerg less in every division because they just suck, and they suck even more on low level division because they are harder to play. Zerg aren't less popular at beginning, they just are less played because it's way harder to play them and even when you are pretty good they stay weaker than the others race (with ZvT the worst matchup) | ||
|
Iggyhopper
United States259 Posts
On August 17 2010 02:27 Liquid`HayprO wrote: i think the maps are a bigger reasons to the success terrans are having atm. some maps are just autowins for terran. Agreed. Some maps are even autolosses. For example, TvZ in a map with a ramp and then a destructible rock ramp. Destroy rocks, and then Zerg wins just because of the fact that Terran has an open entrance. TvT is amazing. PvT is amazing but dull. PvP is horrendous. PvZ is ? ZvZ is worse than PvP. TvZ is rofl. | ||
|
GreatFall
United States1061 Posts
| ||
|
virgozero
Canada412 Posts
| ||
|
Zato-1
Chile4253 Posts
On August 15 2010 12:49 IdrA wrote: i said top 10 and you really need to stop posting, statistics are irrelevant because when we talk about balance we mean the very best. not the top 50, top 100, top whatever. the people who are relevant in tournaments. I'm kinda late for the discussion on balance vs. statistics, but I made a nice post on another thread on why Statistics will NOT show imbalance unless you're looking at them right; I'll just shamelessly quote myself from this thread http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=144675 + Show Spoiler + OP: Do a small thought experiment with me, will you? Imagine that you know 3 players among the vast numbers of players on Battle.net. Skill-wise, two of them (who play Terran and Zerg) belong in mid Platinum. Another one (Protoss), skill-wise, belongs in mid Gold. However, in this hypothetical example, Zerg is so massively underpowered compared to the other two races, that other T and P players who belong in mid platinum will generally crush Zerg players of the same skill level. So, our Zerg player, who skill-wise belongs in mid platinum, gets bumped down to Gold. There, he's facing other somewhat-skilled Zergs and less-skilled Protoss and Terran players. There, he can compensate for his weaker race with his greater skill. And he will achieve the same winrate as the less-skilled Protoss in Gold, and the equally-skilled Terran in Platinum; roughly 50%. Battle.net matchmaking is DESIGNED to make everyone have roughly the same winrate over a large number of games (unless they're at the very top or at the very bottom), ergo the winrate and rating of the pack of players at the middle means squat. The only things it could reveal would be matchup-specific imbalances; for instance, if you had T>Z, Z>P, and P>T, then players would tend to lose versus the race they're weak against and win versus the race they're strong against. If you want to know whether imbalances exist, go look at the very top; if one race is hugely over-represented, it's a fair assumption that some of the players there might not belong at the very top, skill-wise, while others of the under-represented races who don't quite make it rank-wise, do belong there, skill-wise. Or, ask the progamers; if they, who know and understand the game best of all, generally agree on an imbalance, then that's also telling. So yeah. For all his quoting of statistics, kajeus is a noob when it comes to interpreting them, and (surprise!) IdrA was right. | ||
|
Pking
Sweden142 Posts
On August 17 2010 06:18 Trok67 wrote: No you can't say that. People play zerg less in every division because they just suck, and they suck even more on low level division because they are harder to play. Zerg aren't less popular at beginning, they just are less played because it's way harder to play them and even when you are pretty good they stay weaker than the others race (with ZvT the worst matchup) If 21-25% choose Zerg for whatever reason, and 19% play Zerg in the top 100, then we get slightly less than the expected result if the race is balanced (overall). I'm just saying that "OMG only 19 Zerg in top 100!!!11" is not a blatant sign of imblance as it looks. | ||
|
Fojji
United Kingdom217 Posts
Some minor zerg tweaking and map changing will do just the trick, blizzard has to announce something soon -.- | ||
|
EffectS
Belgium795 Posts
On August 17 2010 06:15 Pking wrote: This is'nt as bad as it sounds as Zerg is the least popular race played. Looking at the top 5000 races in the different leagues, about 21-25% play Zerg. If the game was perfectly balanced, 21-25 out of top 100 would be Zerg. So that is not overwhelming signs of imbalance. Ye, but if you see Random as perhaps a 9% (tops that is) than other races should be 30% each; but if one race is is below 10% of that, that's a clear sign of imbalance to me. And you're right, I'm only looking at the top 100; but they are the best performing players afterall, and they are that for good reason; because they're the "masters" of their race. | ||
| ||
