|
United Arab Emirates492 Posts
On August 19 2010 08:38 BadManner wrote:By that argument though, you should also include the korean numbers shown here: http://kr.battle.net/sc2/ko/blog/257547In the top 15: 6 Zerg 6 Terran 2 Protoss 1 Random The top 15 is not a large enough sample size to give any indication on balance. Koreans might well say that both Zerg and Terran are OP. P.S. I play exclusively zerg. P.P.S. Stop whining you bastards
No they don't! you know very well that the larger sample is tilted and thus you ignore that but focus attention on something else!
Translate some of the gom matchs, and you will hear what the commentators have to say!
look at korean tournament reults.
look at playxp, and peoples opinion on race balance.
|
Zerg is fine imo . its depand on what maps we play ZvT
Lost Templar <--- very hard for ZvT for example -.-
Steppes of War <--- no comments this map ZvT -_-
Kulas Ravine <--- lol Rofl lmao for ZvT
Metalopolis <--- its like 12:00 vs 8:00 and 2:00 vs 6:00 really hard for ZvT
Others i think its fine in ZvT 
|
On August 19 2010 07:58 overdose wrote:this weeks top 200 in EU something smells bad in 1st 15 :D http://eu.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/407874 01 Terran LucifroN 02 Protoss DuckloadRa 03 Terran SharkGSjoW 04 Zerg mTwDIMAGA 04 Terran roxkisBratOK 06 Terran mTwDeMusliM 07 Terran Satiini 08 Terran LiquidTLO 09 Terran ClouD 10 Terran NTT 11 Terran PrO 12 Terran KeySu 13 Protoss ZeeRaX 14 Protoss mouzMaNa 15 Terran PredY
Nothing wrong there. Zerg is fine. Terran players are just that much better.
|
Zerg just requires a ton more control than all the other races.
|
On August 19 2010 09:24 Sen wrote:
Zerg is fine imo . its depand on what maps we play ZvT
Lost Templar <--- very hard for ZvT for example -.-
Wow, you heard it here first people, right from the zerg master himself!
|
Sanya12364 Posts
On August 19 2010 09:24 Sen wrote:
Zerg is fine imo . its depand on what maps we play ZvT
Lost Templar <--- very hard for ZvT for example -.-
That's right. It could just be the frickin' map pool, again. Blizzard designed imba maps?
|
On August 19 2010 09:37 TanGeng wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2010 09:24 Sen wrote:
Zerg is fine imo . its depand on what maps we play ZvT
Lost Templar <--- very hard for ZvT for example -.- That's right. It could just be the frickin' map pool, again. Blizzard designed imba maps?
I would hate to see cliff abuse and choke abuse removed, simply because one race is so deficient at the mechanics of attack and defense in both those areas. Seems better to add something to zerg to allow them to engage in abusing map terrain.
|
It's kind of sad if one race is designed to be balanced for koreans with 250 apm and not for the rest of us, not for team games. That kind of seems to be the case with zerg. I think the koreans style of play is so apm intensive and great that it removes a lot of zerg disadvantages.
|
zerg sux ... Untill another Boxer of zerg will appear and show us how to roll
edit: ohh forgot... Bilzz maps sux. They need to balanced. Not a game.
|
No need to switch races to get Blizzard's attention.
Just convince Jaedong to play SC2, then Zerg will be so imbalanced that it'll get nerfed.
1) He has to produce good results as a sponsored player.
2) He doesn't want to switch because Terran are stronger at the moment. He wants to draw Blizzard's attention to the fact that on the pro level it is next to impossible to achieve consistently good results with Zerg.
Weak argument, complaining Racial imbalances in a game that's few months old is simply hilarious. The fact that having sponsored players in a premature game is simply contradictory.
The whole competitive SC2 hype is simply laughable, it took Brood Wars years to balance it out with Kespa maps and become competitive.
People are just rushing to be good in SC2 and think they'll become the next Boxer in SC2 since it's new. What a bunch of egocentric idiots.
SC2 still needs a lot to work (possibly expansions) to live up the hype of its predecessor's sequel.
|
Can't compare the early metagame of SC1 to the current state of infant SC2. It's a whole different monster.
The concept of build orders, simple tactics, and strategies were so primitive in 1998. I think the development of those concepts took a few years - but with SC2 those concepts already exist. I'd compare SC2 to say 2002-2003 Brood War, not 1998 StarCraft.
|
On August 19 2010 15:44 TimeToPractice! wrote:
Can't compare the early metagame of SC1 to the current state of infant SC2. It's a whole different monster.
The concept of build orders, simple tactics, and strategies were so primitive in 1998. I think the development of those concepts took a few years - but with SC2 those concepts already exist. I'd compare SC2 to say 2002-2003 Brood War, not 1998 StarCraft.
this is sooo true... you can't compare brood war and starcraft 2 and say that it took years for SC1 and it should be the same for SC2... players now have a long and amazing background by playing brood war, and by the time starcraft 1 came out team liquid was just a baby... now it is what it is... it's easier to get info now than 10 years ago... it's easier to get strats now than 10 years ago. now everything is faster... what 10 years ago took 5 years now it will take 5 months, top.
Starcraft 2 it's not a completly different game... a lot of BW mechanics are still in place.
|
On August 19 2010 09:24 Sen wrote:Zerg is fine imo . its depand on what maps we play ZvT Lost Templar <--- very hard for ZvT for example -.- Steppes of War <--- no comments this map ZvT -_- Kulas Ravine <--- lol Rofl lmao for ZvT Metalopolis <--- its like 12:00 vs 8:00 and 2:00 vs 6:00 really hard for ZvT Others i think its fine in ZvT
well how about you prove it, and make us a reppack!
|
On August 19 2010 09:28 Zombo Joe wrote:
Zerg just requires a ton more control than all the other races.
i disagree tbh. I find terran control to be really hard for me, while Jinro said in an interview that he couldnt master playign the zerg for exactly that reason.
I'd say terran/zerg control is just differetn.
It's protoss that only required you having an F and W buttons on your keyboard
|
On August 19 2010 07:58 overdose wrote:this weeks top 200 in EU something smells bad in 1st 15 :D http://eu.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/407874 01 Terran LucifroN 02 Protoss DuckloadRa 03 Terran SharkGSjoW 04 Zerg mTwDIMAGA 04 Terran roxkisBratOK 06 Terran mTwDeMusliM 07 Terran Satiini 08 Terran LiquidTLO 09 Terran ClouD 10 Terran NTT 11 Terran PrO 12 Terran KeySu 13 Protoss ZeeRaX 14 Protoss mouzMaNa 15 Terran PredY
Ladder statistics.
/facepalm
|
Yeah, I would much rather see Zerg get a choke/cliff abuse option of their own. Right now it's a situation where the more terrain in the game, the worse Zerg gets.
If you ask me, that's not great design by any means.
|
I would love to see blizz side on this. But I guess they would never reveal any statistics so we just have to wait and see for terran nerfs, *cough*, I mean balance changes =)
On a more serious note. It's fun too see that there are regional differences and I wonder how people can explain that zerg has a better representation in korea.
|
More 1 base play in general going on in Korea for starters. Westerners refuse to give up on 14 pool 13 hatch and other plays like that. Meanwhile, Koreans tend to go 14 pool, 30+ hatch w/ like 18 drones and 30 lings.
Other than that, Zerg is starting to dull there too from what I hear. As styles are adapting, Zerg is running out of options.
I could be wrong though...
|
I have a theory that terran players really are better than zerg players. See, the most skilled players are also the ones who will play to win at any cost... so many of them will switch to terran, because in SC2 after all the goal is to win games.
This leads to a higher concentration of skill among terrans, and lower skill level among zerg.
(It's obvious that something is wrong with the TvZ matchup... but I wonder if something like this could be significant or not)
|
I have a theory that terran players really are better than zerg players. See, the most skilled players are also the ones who will play to win at any cost... so many of them will switch to terran, because in SC2 after all the goal is to win games.
That's assuming that terran is indeed better to begin with -- otherwise, why would people who want to win switch to terran?
You have to keep in mind that to talk about how a race "sucks", it implies that it's too difficult for the players in question to play. Technically, unless there's an obvious error somewhere, a perfect player with machine-like micro and perfect knowledge of the opponent should be able to win any game with any race.
But that's not the kind of person we're talking about, since not even the best players are perfect. Therefore beyond the obvious hard counters and DPS per mineral/gas (which I'm sure is more or less ironed out), the only meaningful balance assessment you can make must be a measure of playability.
So if almost none of the best players are using zerg, then well, it's not that the players suck -- it's that zerg sucks!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
