|
On August 16 2010 05:27 Buddhist wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2010 05:15 Numy wrote:On August 16 2010 05:09 Buddhist wrote:This has probably been mentioned before, but I simply don't see nydus abused like it should be. It is a simply incredible mobility tool. You don't have to use it just to backdoor the enemy. You can use it to connect expos, escape contains, flank armies, etc. Really, how can you contain a zerg who uses nydus? You can't. The zerg can easily move his entire army to some other place on the map, then hit the contain from the rear, or just march into the enemy's main, or just expand somewhere, etc. I don't disbelieve that ZvT is imbalanced, but until I see really skilled nydus play, with near-perfect macro in a ZvT at the pro level, then I won't be convinced. On August 16 2010 05:08 holy_war wrote:On August 16 2010 05:03 latan wrote:
well... maybe it's time to realize this is only a videogame after all. "this is only a videogame after all." Right... There's tens of thousands of dollars in tournament prizes/sponsorship pumped into this game right now. So your argument is invalid. Hundreds of thousands.* You walk up to his main and destroy everything while he can't get into your base because of PF and siege tanks. Nydus isn't an answer to the problem. Zerg on 3/4 bases is fine it's the zerg on 1 -> 2 that's the issue. The zerg doesn't have to get into a sieged up main, he can out-expand the Terran. If the Terran tries to move out, that's when you use nydus to abuse T's immobility. You can try backdoors, or just flanks. This is all theorycraft, but I don't think the issue is being gone about appropriately. .
Relying on the opponent to make a mistake in allowing a nydus in the backdoor is the wrong way to approach playing. T immobility is a myth created by Day[9] it would seem. T has far more mobility than they used to in BW and when you factor in that Zerg has far less mobility off creep the relative mobility is far far smaller than it used to be. So how actually do you abuse immobility of something that isn't that immobile?
There are 2 main issue with ZvT. One is surviving the billions of openings T can throw at you without harming themselves and two, having to get broodlords in order to break T defence. Having to survive and get the eco for T3 just to win the game seems slightly strange?
ps: I don't think you are giving players enough credit. Calling flanking something that isn't done is rather absurd. I'm not saying Z lose in ZvT, merely that your suggestions are rather wayward.
|
This is an absolutely ridiculous argument that is brought up all too often.
What the fuck do you think professionals do? Sit on their asses all day complaining?
No. Pro SC2 Zergs (and other aspiring pro's that just play all day) actually DO play games and try to find ways to get over this shit, and they haven't found any. That's why this conversation has come up - because basically every top-tier Zerg acknowledges this problem. Really, go ahead and try to think of anything that will work.
Thought of something yet? Oh, wait, it won't work, because pro's have tried everything. It has been explained many, many times how basically everything under the sun gets rocked by proper Terran play. I don't think you'll see players like Dimaga and Sheth saying that they might switch just on a whim - pro's will try to find a solution to their problem until their isn't one because switching races is a last-ditch effort for pro's.
Not only that, there have been plenty of games shown in plenty of threads that there's a problem with ZvT. People like you just continue to ignore the evidence.
How is the idea that everything has not been explored yet a ridiculous argument, rather than the contrary? You say that many things have been explained to show that how "basically everything" gets rocked by proper terran play. Yet threads like http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=143825 are created every other day.
The ridiculous argument is that Zerg are in a catch-22 without the actual evidence of this lose-lose situation, but rather instead the idea that anything Zerg does will be beaten if the other player is simply doing the right things. Perhaps anything that terran does will be beaten if the protoss player is simply doing the right things? This is a ridiculous argument because it gets us no where.
|
On August 16 2010 05:09 Buddhist wrote:
This has probably been mentioned before, but I simply don't see nydus abused like it should be. It is a simply incredible mobility tool. You don't have to use it just to backdoor the enemy. You can use it to connect expos, escape contains, flank armies, etc.
Really, how can you contain a zerg who uses nydus? You can't. The zerg can easily move his entire army to some other place on the map, then hit the contain from the rear, or just march into the enemy's main, or just expand somewhere, etc.
I don't disbelieve that ZvT is imbalanced, but until I see really skilled nydus play, with near-perfect macro in a ZvT at the pro level, then I won't be convinced.
And what if you aren't being contained? You take your stance on the nydus by thinking that your opponent is going to siege up outside your natural and build bunkers/depots BW style or something. They 1a into you. That's it.
|
On August 16 2010 05:39 Mnijykmirl wrote:Show nested quote +This is an absolutely ridiculous argument that is brought up all too often.
What the fuck do you think professionals do? Sit on their asses all day complaining?
No. Pro SC2 Zergs (and other aspiring pro's that just play all day) actually DO play games and try to find ways to get over this shit, and they haven't found any. That's why this conversation has come up - because basically every top-tier Zerg acknowledges this problem. Really, go ahead and try to think of anything that will work.
Thought of something yet? Oh, wait, it won't work, because pro's have tried everything. It has been explained many, many times how basically everything under the sun gets rocked by proper Terran play. I don't think you'll see players like Dimaga and Sheth saying that they might switch just on a whim - pro's will try to find a solution to their problem until their isn't one because switching races is a last-ditch effort for pro's.
Not only that, there have been plenty of games shown in plenty of threads that there's a problem with ZvT. People like you just continue to ignore the evidence. How is the idea that everything has not been explored yet a ridiculous argument, rather than the contrary? You say that many things have been explained to show that how "basically everything" gets rocked by proper terran play. Yet threads like http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=143825 are created every other day. The ridiculous argument is that Zerg are in a catch-22 without the actual evidence of this lose-lose situation, but rather instead the idea that anything Zerg does will be beaten if the other player is simply doing the right things. Perhaps anything that terran does will be beaten if the protoss player is simply doing the right things? This is a ridiculous argument because it gets us no where.
So threads of mid-level player solutions to ZvT are being created every day? That's great.
People are trying new things. Strangely enough, people play the game AND post on the forums but you only see them post on the forums and think that's all they do. While it might not have been long enough yet, it sure seems like a consensus that zerg is at a disadvantage in the early portion of the game versus Terran. Players like idrA who is better than I would say most everyone playing SC2 right now can be beat by mid-level diamond who simply do a mid-game push.
|
I comepletely agree, I'm not anything close to the top ranked players but I enjoy playing Zerg.
I've been playing Zerg since I was a kid, probably before I even saw D1. Zerg scared the CRAPP outta me back then LOL but I love playing zerg, it's very fluid, with other races, I'm not as fluid, just doesn't feel right you know?
Anywho, back in BW there was serveral things that the Zerg could do to "balance" out the game. IF you used them right, you would win the game.
I've tried many different strats, looking at my own replays and tried every different openers to counter the listed above.
Basically, Zerg is too ground based plus VERY weak.
You can't get basically any Anti-Air until your Lair pops up and that's about 3 minutes in the game if you still make some ground reinforcements. Basically we have Banelings, Speedlings, Roaches in Tier one. Oh and queen, if u want to mass them :S
By the time we even get into Tier 2 where all the somewhat goodies are, Hydras, Mutas, Infestors.
The other players such as Protoss will have a few void rays out before we can get a few mutas out or a few hydras.
or the Terran player has tanks, banshees. They get Reapers in Tier one, seriously.
I also love the fact that 1x Void will kill your queen, having NO anti-air units will let it sit on ur Lair or Hatchery and will kill it like NOTHING. Just sits there and hums while he macros more whatever he's going for.
Plus, they can go for Pheonix. Pheonix harrassment devestate Zerg players, basically Zerg is VERY weak to Air units in SC2, maybe it's just me.
Yes, I'm not counting the fact that he doesn't have a good ground force but blocking + single zealot wall is pretty annoying to lings + roaches, you won't even be able to get roaches out because your so focused on getting the pheonix out of the way.
Hydras, they are WAY too slow. Like it is RIDICULOUS compared to all the other units, speedlings are fast as HELL, yes but is it worth it to sacrifice movement speed on our roaches or hydras?
This is all from my perspective. Basically, we're just as balanced as the other races. I'm not saying that the other races are OP or anything, I think they're perfectly fine, I'm just saying that Zerg needs some work.
I agree with the post owner's arguement entirely and the people flaming about L2 play or whatever, that's not helpful.
Most people can see this as bias arguement, Zerg is fine due to X reason because they're not Zerg players or they love crushing zerg.
At the end of the day, if the Terran/Protoss has lower knowledge of counters, macro, micro and all that - Zerg player will win if you EXCEED his knowledge or manage to catch a break.
If the Terran/Protoss is = with the Zerg player. Zerg will 95% of the time lose.
If I'm up against Diamond players, I expect them to have = skill time as me or even >. I try my best, do everything right for the most part and I end up being crushed cause it's zerg is too slow on teching.
Different ways to counter this? Tech faster, this doesn't help because if they find out, your base is gone from ground attacks.
Air harrassment? Evolution Chamber then Spore Crawlers? Doesn't help with the fact that your ground units do NOT have defence against air.
Personally I miss Scourge and Lurkers, they were fun!
I love playing zerg but I get so frustrated when they're at like 60-80 APM when I'm at like 250-300 busting my head open to win and eventually they win anyway.
I'm not saying I lose to EVERY ZxP/T matches but I've began to notice the cons of Zerg and pros of other races, I try to counter then, defend against what makes Zerg flawed but it just doesn't work.
I'm ready for the flaming :D
EDIT: I'm not focusing on ZxP but I'm just thinking of other races, this post was originally ZxT but it was already explained above, just trying to balance out everyone's QQing about how Zerg is fine. Yeah it's fun to win but it gets SO boring after playing against someone who can't do ANYTHING to counter it. It's like a Hydra vs SCV or something. BORING.
|
I think that the problem with terran are vikings. In BW they never had a good air to air unit. So toss or zerg could attack by air and ground to take down the op ground forces terran had. They should nerf vikings and bring back lurkers then SC2 would be fine.
Edit: and make the zerg units less food. There is no massable unit anymore.
|
|
|
You know why this thread is failing right now? Because every other zerg is blaming imbalance for their own lack of skill. The imba is only really apparent on the higher skill level. In fact, I argue that even Dimaga and Sheth hasn't hit the cap to exploit zerg to fullest now. (but then again, I've never been too fond of Dimaga's style since I only watched his recent games where they all just appeared to be all in's ...) To pull it even further, I'd say the skill cap of most SC2 pros are significantly less than the pros from BW simply because the skill cap entry is noticeably lower in the game due to innate friendly mechanics. So no, just because the pros currently aren't successful isn't the entirety of the argument. While Zerg is definitely harder to play than Terran, there is definitely too many holes that TvZ fails to cover but it is NOT the end all, be all for all your losses. If you lose to a "lower skilled" player in MOST cases it was YOUR fault. I play mostly Z and P and hell I've felt "wtf this is bullshit moments too". Zerg is very razors edge perfectionist but the exaggeration of how wide the imba is (for ex. three posts above mine has a player claiming he is 250-300apm vs 80apm players and he can't win. O RLY? wtf are you even doing with your 250-300 apm's then?), is just beyond stupid because if anything it makes the actual rational arguments look bad too.
|
On August 16 2010 03:07 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2010 02:34 eH wrote:On August 16 2010 01:46 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 16 2010 01:15 monitor wrote:
I think Zerg could be added a few new units in a nearby expansion, but in the mean time these are the changes I think would majorly change the state of ZvT (keep in mind they are pretty big and probably won't happen):
Marauder Concussive Shells- increase to 100/100, add shot cooldown (~5 seconds)
Tank Fire- the tanks 'Smart Fire" needs to be removed (make the siege tank not insta-hit)
Bunker Salvage- only return %50, increase time to salvage
Viking AA- decrease range to 7
Raven- increase build time by 10 seconds
What do you guys think? Is this completely ridiculous? The last two are. First, people need to STOP ASKING TO REDUCE VIKING RANGE. That would fuck up TvP very, very badly seeing as Colossi are already incredibly powerful.Second, Ravens already cost a shit-ton, take a long ass time to build, and have only one good ability (and one fairly gimmicky one). The nerf to them is completely unnecessary. If you're going to nerf something, do it with a point, not just because "T needs to be nerfed". Other than that, yes, Salvage and Tank fire definitely need to be fixed. I'm not sure about Marauders. I always thought that Stim was pretty unnecessary on such a powerful unit, but I haven't seen them as that incredibly game-breaking in a while now. I don't understand why people think terran absolutely must have a range 9 air to air fighter in order to deal with collosi, or that the lack of one will somehow "fuck up" tvp. Corruptors are range 6 and they're constantly brought up as a zerg counter for collosi (despite the fact that once you kill the collosi, they're basically useless while vikings can serve in several capacities), and personally I use mutas in that capacity and they have all of range 3. So how exactly would a proposed reduction to 7 which still leaves them with greater range then any other air to air fighter absolutely destroy their usefulness? Because Corruptors don't have the health of a paper airplane and Terran don't have much else to deal with Colossi. If the range is reduced this means that Vikings will automatically be within the Stalker's maximum range (as in not at the Stalkers full reach), making them much more vulnerable to Stalkers auto-targeting them.
Corruptors are far more expensive than vikings to justfy the cost; and range 7 is fine, oh noe, the protoss actually has a chance to fight back!
|
On August 16 2010 05:49 Nooborghini wrote:
I comepletely agree, I'm not anything close to the top ranked players but I enjoy playing Zerg.
I've been playing Zerg since I was a kid, probably before I even saw D1. Zerg scared the CRAPP outta me back then LOL but I love playing zerg, it's very fluid, with other races, I'm not as fluid, just doesn't feel right you know?
Anywho, back in BW there was serveral things that the Zerg could do to "balance" out the game. IF you used them right, you would win the game.
I've tried many different strats, looking at my own replays and tried every different openers to counter the listed above.
Basically, Zerg is too ground based plus VERY weak.
You can't get basically any Anti-Air until your Lair pops up and that's about 3 minutes in the game if you still make some ground reinforcements. Basically we have Banelings, Speedlings, Roaches in Tier one. Oh and queen, if u want to mass them :S
By the time we even get into Tier 2 where all the somewhat goodies are, Hydras, Mutas, Infestors.
The other players such as Protoss will have a few void rays out before we can get a few mutas out or a few hydras.
or the Terran player has tanks, banshees. They get Reapers in Tier one, seriously.
I also love the fact that 1x Void will kill your queen, having NO anti-air units will let it sit on ur Lair or Hatchery and will kill it like NOTHING. Just sits there and hums while he macros more whatever he's going for.
Plus, they can go for Pheonix. Pheonix harrassment devestate Zerg players, basically Zerg is VERY weak to Air units in SC2, maybe it's just me.
Yes, I'm not counting the fact that he doesn't have a good ground force but blocking + single zealot wall is pretty annoying to lings + roaches, you won't even be able to get roaches out because your so focused on getting the pheonix out of the way.
Hydras, they are WAY too slow. Like it is RIDICULOUS compared to all the other units, speedlings are fast as HELL, yes but is it worth it to sacrifice movement speed on our roaches or hydras?
This is all from my perspective. Basically, we're just as balanced as the other races. I'm not saying that the other races are OP or anything, I think they're perfectly fine, I'm just saying that Zerg needs some work.
I agree with the post owner's arguement entirely and the people flaming about L2 play or whatever, that's not helpful.
Most people can see this as bias arguement, Zerg is fine due to X reason because they're not Zerg players or they love crushing zerg.
At the end of the day, if the Terran/Protoss has lower knowledge of counters, macro, micro and all that - Zerg player will win if you EXCEED his knowledge or manage to catch a break.
If the Terran/Protoss is = with the Zerg player. Zerg will 95% of the time lose.
If I'm up against Diamond players, I expect them to have = skill time as me or even >. I try my best, do everything right for the most part and I end up being crushed cause it's zerg is too slow on teching.
Different ways to counter this? Tech faster, this doesn't help because if they find out, your base is gone from ground attacks.
Air harrassment? Evolution Chamber then Spore Crawlers? Doesn't help with the fact that your ground units do NOT have defence against air.
Personally I miss Scourge and Lurkers, they were fun!
I love playing zerg but I get so frustrated when they're at like 60-80 APM when I'm at like 250-300 busting my head open to win and eventually they win anyway.
I'm not saying I lose to EVERY ZxP/T matches but I've began to notice the cons of Zerg and pros of other races, I try to counter then, defend against what makes Zerg flawed but it just doesn't work.
I'm ready for the flaming :D
This is probably one of the best first posts ever. Quite simply its not that Zerg loses an abhorant amount of games to P and more specifically T, its that Zerg is forced to play a very confined and specific style in order to counter certain builds, while there is little Zerg can do to force the opponent to play a confined and specific style. It is not that the other races need nerfs so much as it is Zerg needs some buffs and/or tweeks.
|
best balance thread at the time.. i love the OP games, and im very worried about this z problems. Im a top player from LA and im arguing all the time with my fellows about those problems.
I hope a blizzard fix sooner
to OP: maybe u can analyze the problems with maps too, its another interesting balance issue.
|
On August 16 2010 04:38 Mnijykmirl wrote:
No post is a great post if it is all positing and comparing apples to oranges. Especially with SC:BW setting the precedent that the different races work in extremely different ways. This thread is almost all positing and without attention to practice. This creates false arguments. "Zerg can't do x, Terran can do Y" tries to say something, but does it directly relate to the full reality of a game and the ability to win?
It rather depends on what X and Y are.
Take scouting for example.
One of the racial advantages of the Zerg is their ability to vary their unit composition very quickly. They can go from lots of one unit to lots of another faster than any race. That's the purpose of giving them centralized unit production. To balance this advantage, Zerg units are generally cost-for-cost weaker than other units.
But this advantage has an prerequisite, one that is quite obvious if you think about it. In order to use this advantage, one must be fully aware of the situation, so that one can choose an appropriate unit mixture to handle it.
Therefore, if the Zerg are unable to learn what the situation is, say, due to a Terran walling in and positioning buildings such that scouting Overlords never see them, then this advantage means nothing. And if the advantage means nothing, but the disadvantage is still in effect, this makes the whole thing imbalanced.
Also, the advantage has another prerequisite: that the Zerg player has a fairly large number of options available to them. After all, if the Zerg player doesn't have very many possible units, what good is being able to vary unit composition?
Before Lair-Tech (which means Lair + a building), the Zerg have only 3 possible units they can choose from. A ground generalist (Zergling), a heavy-ground specialist, and a light-ground specialist. This simply does not provide a large number of options to the Zerg. It does provide some, but not very many. Not enough to make the Zerg racial advantage really matter.
On August 16 2010 04:38 Mnijykmirl wrote:I think too many Zerg see this question of "what exactly is the problem?" and answer with: What would be fun, anyway? I am not happy with some of the designs of the races either, but bringing it to balance takes it too far. Furthermore, how are you so sure that you are playing Z v T to the best reality of the game?
Fun and balance often go hand-in-hand.
I can't talk about what others find "fun", but I like having options. One of the reasons I play SC2 and not SC1 is because everything isn't distilled down to a small set of builds. I like being able to do something odd, off-the-wall. The inevitable ossification of SC2 into "standard play" is not something I'm interested in. And one of the things I love about the Zerg is that you can change your options quickly, switching from tech to tech to keep your opponent off-balance, attacking where he is weakest and so forth.
So when I play Zerg, and I'm against a Terran, and I really only have one or two viable openings, this is not fun. It is not interesting. This is poor gameplay. But it is also imbalanced; if the Terran knows what I'm going to do without having to scout, then he has a strong advantage. He can optimize builds that can effectively deal with my few openings.
On August 16 2010 04:38 Mnijykmirl wrote:
TL;DR, too much talk, not enough play. There is a sour mindset growing in players, but it is not grounded. There needs to be evidence, in the form of games, that show Zerg losses beyond the control of Zerg. Not threads like this.
This is where we get into something I brought up in another thread: the presumption of balance.
Your argument basically puts the burden of proof on people making the claim that the game is imbalanced. But where is the proof that the game is balanced? Why should we not require both parties provide evidence for their position, one way or the other?
If you want to claim that Zerg players are just QQing and should L2P, fine: back it up with some evidence that the Zerg race is just fine as is.
StarCraft 2 is only 3 weeks old. Is there some reason I should automatically assume that it is balanced?
This game is not StarCraft 1; it has not been out for 12 years and had 16+patches. It has not had 12 years of rigorous playtesting under professional conditions. Assuming that SC2 is as balanced as SC1 at this juncture is simply being blind to reality.
|
On August 16 2010 05:55 KissBlade wrote:
While Zerg is definitely harder to play than Terran, there is definitely too many holes that TvZ fails to cover but it is NOT the end all, be all for all your losses. If you lose to a "lower skilled" player in MOST cases it was YOUR fault.
If you agree that Zerg is harder to play than Terran, then you are effectively admitting to an imbalance. Because that's what imbalance is.
In a balanced game, a match between two players of equal skill would come down to chance. If it is harder (ie: requires more skill) to win against an opponent, then the game is imbalanced.
Yes: if you aren't a top-tier player, you could have played better. You could have had enough skill more than your less skilled opponent to beat them. So you could still improve. But that doesn't change the fact that the game is imbalanced. And that doesn't change the fact that the imbalance should be corrected.
|
On August 16 2010 02:16 shape wrote:
Sucha good read and I agree completely and don't believe that anyone that actually plays zerg as their race can say that they are "fine" when they get hard-countered by terran so easily.
I dont know,i think zerg can still counter well,but they must always know what the terran has.This means constant scouting,otherwise its GG.Still they do appear to be missing a unit.
Between the Speed of the Lings,the Burrowed infestor,the Drops and the Nydis Worms,i think zerg has a lot of ways to creatively deal with terran.And they have power-units.Hydra and Ultra.They have harras-units.Ling,infestor,muta.
The roach is the only thing that really irks me.Like what is that?When exactly an i suppose to use it?Mass rines 
|
i actually switched from terran to zerg just to see how it is, and as terran i could be EXTREMELY far behind, 2-3 bases behind, 30-50 food behind, and block one major attack and just counter attack ftw with ease.
since playing zerg my winrate has tanked because 2 out of 3 games are vs terran. and every terran does blatantly abusive shit that in a years time will be complete garbage. the only time i can win vs t is if he makes so huge stupid error, and the matchup clearly is broken if you can only win if ur opponents making stupid errors. wins should be based off your correct plays not your opponents mistakes.
EDIT: and people throwing out this broodlord crap obviously havent played a good terran, they just keep track of your spire and periodically scout for a greater spire and have a starport in place ready to pump vikings as soon as they catch wind of that shit. (and even if they dont actually catch your spire theyll just do it anyways if they see your unit composition and predict broodlords) you VERY, VERY, rarely actually surprise a terran with broodlords. and saying you should 2 base tech to ultras is awful as well, terran midgame pushes are incredibly potent and if you burn any resources over-teching to BL or ultras you will get absolutely stomped because your paper armys going to get shredded in 5 seconds...
EDIT2: give me a break, nydus harass is okay, but any good terran just throws some scouting depots at the edges of his base and blocks every fucking nydus attempt, ive seen so many games where a terran will just leave a tank or something patrolling the edges and automatically blocking nydus attempts.
EDIT3: when i did play terran (for about 4 months of sc2) and i played vs zerg, i openly acknowledged to myself the fact that any game i had ever played against a zerg on ladder that i had played solid and to my ability in i won, in a blowout.
|
On August 16 2010 05:55 KissBlade wrote: The imba is only really apparent on the higher skill level.
I went from gold up, I have felt the imbalance since low plat.
|
On August 16 2010 06:17 NicolBolas wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2010 05:55 KissBlade wrote:
While Zerg is definitely harder to play than Terran, there is definitely too many holes that TvZ fails to cover but it is NOT the end all, be all for all your losses. If you lose to a "lower skilled" player in MOST cases it was YOUR fault. If you agree that Zerg is harder to play than Terran, then you are effectively admitting to an imbalance. Because that's what imbalance is. In a balanced game, a match between two players of equal skill would come down to chance. If it is harder (ie: requires more skill) to win against an opponent, then the game is imbalanced. Yes: if you aren't a top-tier player, you could have played better. You could have had enough skill more than your less skilled opponent to beat them. So you could still improve. But that doesn't change the fact that the game is imbalanced. And that doesn't change the fact that the imbalance should be corrected.
Protoss is the easiest race to play at lower skill levels in BW. In fact, this was readily apparently in NA/EU side even at pro levels. So does that mean they were imba because of it? Please. I already said there was imbalance so I don't see why "effectively admitting to an imbalance" really detracts from my argument. My argument was, more and more people are crapping out this thread by using it as a crutch for their own deficiencies.
|
On August 16 2010 06:24 KissBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2010 06:17 NicolBolas wrote:On August 16 2010 05:55 KissBlade wrote:
While Zerg is definitely harder to play than Terran, there is definitely too many holes that TvZ fails to cover but it is NOT the end all, be all for all your losses. If you lose to a "lower skilled" player in MOST cases it was YOUR fault. If you agree that Zerg is harder to play than Terran, then you are effectively admitting to an imbalance. Because that's what imbalance is. In a balanced game, a match between two players of equal skill would come down to chance. If it is harder (ie: requires more skill) to win against an opponent, then the game is imbalanced. Yes: if you aren't a top-tier player, you could have played better. You could have had enough skill more than your less skilled opponent to beat them. So you could still improve. But that doesn't change the fact that the game is imbalanced. And that doesn't change the fact that the imbalance should be corrected. Protoss is the easiest race to play at lower skill levels in BW. In fact, this was readily apparently in NA/EU side even at pro levels. So does that mean they were imba because of it? Please. I already said there was imbalance so I don't see why "effectively admitting to an imbalance" really detracts from my argument. My argument was, more and more people are crapping out this thread by using it as a crutch for their own deficiencies.
Does it matter? Why listen to them, they're QQing over something that isn't right. Yeah there are some Bronze-Silver ranked players QQing BECAUSE a pro is doing a solid argument about it. It doesn't mean that you should feed the flame and flame them. Everyone started somewhere, they're just trying to "fit in" with the thread.
Focus your concern onto the REAL facts why we're having this thread.
Why do we have this thread? Because Zerg isn't as balanced to the other races. Is it fair that I play 250-300 APM against a 40-60 APM player? Not really. It's frustrating.
Don't try to focus this onto my "skill" level. All the people who know what they're talking about and dedicate their time watching countless replays and try to "perfect" their Zerg strat agree with me. There are other factors counting in, counter attack or whatnot during those "harrassment" periods but it's just a shot in the dark, if they manage to have defence, or a block *most likely* they will > your zerglings. PERIOD.
I don't know anyone on the site but I feel at home because I can argue about stuff like this with other acknowlegable players that know their stuff. I apologize for any hostility but just focus on the main reason why we have this thread.
|
[B]
You can't get basically any Anti-Air until your Lair pops up and that's about 3 minutes in the game if you still make some ground reinforcements. Basically we have Banelings, Speedlings, Roaches in Tier one. Oh and queen, if u want to mass them :S
By the time we even get into Tier 2 where all the somewhat goodies are, Hydras, Mutas, Infestors.
The other players such as Protoss will have a few void rays out before we can get a few mutas out or a few hydras.
i agree with what you're saying about the lack of low tier anti air, but just a comment, you can use evo chamber and a few spore crawlers +2-3 queens to DELAY (definitely not the solution to voidrays in the least) the attack until you can get hydras out.
|
On August 16 2010 06:35 raph wrote:Show nested quote +[B]
You can't get basically any Anti-Air until your Lair pops up and that's about 3 minutes in the game if you still make some ground reinforcements. Basically we have Banelings, Speedlings, Roaches in Tier one. Oh and queen, if u want to mass them :S
By the time we even get into Tier 2 where all the somewhat goodies are, Hydras, Mutas, Infestors.
The other players such as Protoss will have a few void rays out before we can get a few mutas out or a few hydras.
i agree with what you're saying about the lack of low tier anti air, but just a comment, you can use evo chamber and a few spore crawlers +2-3 queens to DELAY (definitely not the solution to voidrays in the least) the attack until you can get hydras out.
I have tried that, it's mostly something I do go but it kills my late game. It's just not as balanced.
I can do that with my friends who aren't at my level cause they can't macro or micro as hard as me, they say that it's cause I'm a korean lol. Anywho
It's just not sensible, the fact that you waste 125 + for evo + drone PLUS 150 per spore when they get rocked.
So you drop 125, have like 4x seems reasonable, that is 150x4 = 600 + 125 and u say u want queens in? you should have ur first queen anyway so then thats another 150 added on top.
600+125+150 = 875. that's almost 1000 minerals gone for 4-5 void rays or 5 pheonix harrassment.
If they had proper macro, they wud have GREAT amouts of ground forces. While you have 24-26 zerglings.
It's just not justified.
EDIT: plus the fact that you have to waste time making these structures and replace your drones. It's a HUGE late game killer, if they just focus on void rays and they have nothing on ground then there's a good investment in that "anti-air defence" but other wise? It kills just a bit more than half of a mineral node. It coulda gotten to better use. Right?
Also, my math may be off for the cost of spore colonies, I just havn't focused on the cost for them yet :S.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
