|
On August 30 2010 23:08 dybydx wrote:
6. the new AI also help Z with auto surround and the clumped Terran ball increase effectiveness of banelings, plaguuu and ultralisks. all of these have been observed and used effectively in high level play by Z players.
You do realise that by clumping up as a ball, there is less surface area for a Baneling to target and explode right? This means that your Baneling's splash is minimised, not increased like you insinuated.
|
On August 31 2010 17:35 nybbas wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2010 16:59 dybydx wrote:
i agree with Rabiator that alot of the current problems are map related. alot of the famous maps in BW had very large openings in the center that allow Z many options to surround T.
although back then there was dark swarm so Z could just 1a into the T ball. You really come off as wanting to blame everything but a possible Terran imbalance. (not that I disagree that the current map pool is total BS if you are zerg) In BW all the units were also 2d, so you didnt have the problem of an SCV hiding behind a thor/planetary fortress, being a total pain in the ass to click on. Not to mention autorepair taking away ANY sort of micro skill needed to do the repairing... So defilers autocast dark swarm in BW if you attack moved them? I don't remember that...
You really come off as if you have to find some imbalanced units or you are unhappy [unnecessary sentence in both cases IMO]. I am not saying there are no units which require tweaking, but simply increasing the map size eliminates a shitload of problems in all matchups, because it allows all three races to fully use their strengths AND it doesnt negate the weaknesses of some races (immobility is negated totally if you only have 50 yards to drive to the opponents base as we see on Steppes of War or Incineration Zone and at the same time Zerg mobility advantage is negated as well, because there is no room to use it).
The real problem with the "map size imbalance" is that you actually have to THINK to recognize it, because that isnt made up of numbers. With siege tank damage, roach armor, roach food, reaper damage, ... its all numbers and numbers are easy to understand for most simple minds which whine about the imbalance.
Personally I expect Zerg to become imbalanced once they can realize the full potential of the race on larger maps simply because the mobility advantage (Nydus worm somewhere close to the enemy) plus the instant reproduction of a destroyed 200/200 army from many bases will provide too much pressure once the Zerg has 4 bases or so. The current downsizing of siege tank damage will make these units somewhat useless, because the Terran will have to spread out to defend his bases due to the lack of an easy to build [PF isnt easy to build and its bulk doesnt allow placement everywhere] static defense that shoots ground.
|
On September 01 2010 00:36 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2010 17:35 nybbas wrote:On August 31 2010 16:59 dybydx wrote:
i agree with Rabiator that alot of the current problems are map related. alot of the famous maps in BW had very large openings in the center that allow Z many options to surround T.
although back then there was dark swarm so Z could just 1a into the T ball. You really come off as wanting to blame everything but a possible Terran imbalance. (not that I disagree that the current map pool is total BS if you are zerg) In BW all the units were also 2d, so you didnt have the problem of an SCV hiding behind a thor/planetary fortress, being a total pain in the ass to click on. Not to mention autorepair taking away ANY sort of micro skill needed to do the repairing... So defilers autocast dark swarm in BW if you attack moved them? I don't remember that... You really come off as if you have to find some imbalanced units or you are unhappy [unnecessary sentence in both cases IMO]. I am not saying there are no units which require tweaking, but simply increasing the map size eliminates a shitload of problems in all matchups, because it allows all three races to fully use their strengths AND it doesnt negate the weaknesses of some races (immobility is negated totally if you only have 50 yards to drive to the opponents base as we see on Steppes of War or Incineration Zone and at the same time Zerg mobility advantage is negated as well, because there is no room to use it). The real problem with the "map size imbalance" is that you actually have to THINK to recognize it, because that isnt made up of numbers. With siege tank damage, roach armor, roach food, reaper damage, ... its all numbers and numbers are easy to understand for most simple minds which whine about the imbalance.
Blizzard designed small maps to encourage quicker, more aggressive games. While I agree that much of the balance problems could be solved if you simply made maps bigger, whether or not Blizzard is actually willing to make bigger maps is another hurdle in and of itself, and so we shouldn't rely on that as the holy grail. And even if the factions were balanced that way, it wouldn't change the fact that Zerg is still bland and boring to play compared to Terran.
|
On September 01 2010 00:40 Karkadinn wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2010 00:36 Rabiator wrote:On August 31 2010 17:35 nybbas wrote:On August 31 2010 16:59 dybydx wrote:
i agree with Rabiator that alot of the current problems are map related. alot of the famous maps in BW had very large openings in the center that allow Z many options to surround T.
although back then there was dark swarm so Z could just 1a into the T ball. You really come off as wanting to blame everything but a possible Terran imbalance. (not that I disagree that the current map pool is total BS if you are zerg) In BW all the units were also 2d, so you didnt have the problem of an SCV hiding behind a thor/planetary fortress, being a total pain in the ass to click on. Not to mention autorepair taking away ANY sort of micro skill needed to do the repairing... So defilers autocast dark swarm in BW if you attack moved them? I don't remember that... You really come off as if you have to find some imbalanced units or you are unhappy [unnecessary sentence in both cases IMO]. I am not saying there are no units which require tweaking, but simply increasing the map size eliminates a shitload of problems in all matchups, because it allows all three races to fully use their strengths AND it doesnt negate the weaknesses of some races (immobility is negated totally if you only have 50 yards to drive to the opponents base as we see on Steppes of War or Incineration Zone and at the same time Zerg mobility advantage is negated as well, because there is no room to use it). The real problem with the "map size imbalance" is that you actually have to THINK to recognize it, because that isnt made up of numbers. With siege tank damage, roach armor, roach food, reaper damage, ... its all numbers and numbers are easy to understand for most simple minds which whine about the imbalance. Blizzard designed small maps to encourage quicker, more aggressive games. While I agree that much of the balance problems could be solved if you simply made maps bigger, whether or not Blizzard is actually willing to make bigger maps is another hurdle in and of itself, and so we shouldn't rely on that as the holy grail. And even if the factions were balanced that way, it wouldn't change the fact that Zerg is still bland and boring to play compared to Terran.
They are totally unwilling to add bigger maps and even the biggest maps they have provided do not have the bases in the corners to provide maximum scout / rush distance. Blizzard wants ACTION and not STRATEGY ... sadly.
The only map which comes close to being "big in the middle" is Delta Quadrant, but that one has the "safe natural" soooo close to the guy next door that its ridiculously easy to invade with reapers, blink stalkers or colossi. If it was twice as wide and twice as high with the same size for the three bases per spawn it would be a good start.
|
Even assuming the match-up gets balanced through maps, that doesnt change the fact that ZvT as it is right now is incredibly boring, not to mention having to rely on maps to balance out design flaws is all well and dandy in a game like BW, but in SC2, in my opinion, doing so isn't enough to ensure the game is interesting to watch as a spectator, which to me is one of the most important things, as I really do love to watch players far better than me duke it out.
TL;DR: I agree with OP. Please have my babies.
Edit: also, that sentence is waaay too long.
|
Ive watched nexgenius vs cool latest 2 games.
honestly cool lost so easy and was nothing he can do , i feel that a good player with toss is as much as hard as a terran if not more.
As more and more toss players will start learning new strats the hardest will be for zerg.
Its a design flaw , both these races have been made to counter zerg in this game till heart of the swarm where hopefully zerg will be the strongest due to again design decisions.
this wont be changing anytime soon imo
|
I really don't buy the wait until race x gets their own game/expansion deal. I mean Blizzard straight up said they wanted this as an eSports game. If so, why should certain races become flavor of the expansion? Shouldn't a game that only has three races or options to play as be as balance as possible at all given times? If anything, Heart of the Swarm and (Something Protoss-y) of the Void should be like Brood War where it adds additional units to further keep the three races as balanced as possible.
|
im a genious !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
how to fix ZvT:
give queens the ability to burrow without the need to research it + a slight health regeneration (same as roach).
god im good ...
|
I've been racking my brains for days trying to figure out how to beat Terran...sheesh. Leave for a month and this happens.
|
In my opinion BW and SC2 play are very similar where T goes bio or mech and Z must respond as needed.
In BW Terran Bio play was countered by mutalisk map control and lurker positioning in SC2 just replace lurker placement and positioning with baneling flanks and positioning forcing a slightly lower econ game.
In BW Terran mech play has always been countered with having lots of "stuff" to throw at the terran. This must also be done in SC2, you cant find a gimmick where you can kill 10 tanks cost effectively, 1 lurker or few banelings may kill tons of bio units but with mech micro plays such as these are not possible. It turns into a giant macrofest where it heavily depends on who can make the most "stuff" T might kill 10 hydras with on tank but you generally have map control with mobility in BW as well as a much more stable and powerful economy (where Z may have 4-5 expos to T's 2-3) and can make enough "stuff" to beat T's cost effectiveness.
In SC2 however getting 4-5 bases as zerg to a terrans 2-3 is near impossible, with strong reaper openings, hellion harrass, banshee harrass, and other various openings that restrict economy forcing a weak early game economy not allowing zerg to get enough "stuff" to beat mech
Even now in BW with the midgame switch from bio to mech, Z are having problems because Z cannot saturate their bases with early bio pressure and cannot maintain a strong economy to beat the cost effectiveness of Mech.
I think longer build times for Terran tech may be able to fix this problem or even a buff to queen attack so hellions, reapers and banshees can be defended by Z more effectively without major economic loss
As many top zergs have been saying Zerg needs a more viable early game so they dont go into the midgame with a sub par economy
Just my 2 cents tho
(Please dont take this as SC2 should have similar Gameplay to BW im just trying to make a comparison)
|
I love you masterasia for finally sticking up for zerg instead of switching races like so many others. I am by no means at your level of play, but I know what I am doing, imo anyway. My record is like 30-24 and about 20 of those losses were to pathetic terran players that get the easy job. I played terran MY FIRST TIME the other day and I have played since phase 1. I played vs a low diam and I EASILY won the game. Early siege and rauds took his expansion and there was nothing left to do. I think you should copy + paste this post on a few other websites (battle.net included). I also agree with you point that playing zerg versus terran is insanely tense for me the whole time...you feel hopeless just going into the game. ZvZ...so broke imo..ZvP is the only fun matchup for me. I love all the "LEET SKILLZ" terran players replying to this post claiming your an idiot too. I look forward to teaming up with you in the future to drink all the terran tears when the zerg is balanced and fun to play once again.
|
I lost to one terran so far today
It was 100% my fault
my life is awesome
so is zerg
I <3 the swarm
|
I am just a lowly platinum zerg but I just wanted to comment on this because it will make me feel a little better. It took me awhile to admit it but the OP here is just so right, it is kind of depressing to play zerg right now, I am at the point where I am not sure if I should press on or start practicing with another race. I really don't see how the proposed 1.1 changes will help anything in ZvT, I think it will help ZvP vs. 2 gate more than anything, but that really isn't a big problem when compared to ZvT. If I stick with zerg and things don't get better for zerg, I will probably burn myself out before HotS is even released to too frustration.
Yes like others have said I can lose a ZvT and I can watch the replay and see where I went wrong, the important thing here is you have to also look at what the T is doing both right and wrong and judge your mistakes against his. Some of the Ts I have lost are just downright depressing due to the skill differences, losing to people who don't use any hotkeys, to people who let thousands of minerals stack up, losing to people who don't use mules at all, losing to people who don't tech switch at all, etc.
Overall I feel like a platinum zerg has to be a much better player than a platinum T, this is what I have learned from watching my replays. I feel like Z always has to start off the game blind and you cannot scout effectively (if at all) after the wall is up, before getting Lair+Overlord speed (or overseer) - both of which are expensive and put you at great risk to an early game timing push of you go for them too quickly (which is still a big risk if you don't get a quick lair, lol). The pre-wall scout with a drone helps, but not extremely due to how many options the T has with barracks+tech labs, and how easy it is for him to switch up is unit mix without you having a clue.
So at the critical point in the game where you really want to know what the T is teching/massing, you have to go blind, and of course the Z unit mix does not seem to help overcome this disadvantage. Because of this I feel like I am always playing catch up to the T, and I usually can win if I play a bad T who is stupid enough to keep using the same tech over and over (which is fairly common for me in plat...which is why I can actually win a fair amount of games vs. T). If they tech switch faster than me, or at the same rate as me trying to keep up with them, they will win. Keep in mind it is also easier for them to tech switch faster than me because they are able to start the game with me in a consistently defensive position.
I am probably not smart enough to fix the balance issues, but I think giving zerg a better scouting method past wall method pre-lair would go a long way, but not long enough. The unit mix obviously needs alot of work as well. We are already at an disadvantage when it comes to early games defense, we are at a disadvantage when it comes to choices of openings, and then on top of that we are at a disadvantage when it comes to early game scouting.
I don't know about other Z players, but I always breath a sigh of relief when I survive the 2-5 minutes after getting a lair, that is when Z actually has a few options and you realize you now have a solid chance at winning. I think all of the ZvT problems can be summed up by saying how much of a joke Z tier 1 is compared to T tier 1.
|
On August 15 2010 12:25 techtron wrote:
Mule should have a 30 second cool down, If i miss an inject with a queen, i dont get that larve but if a terran misses it, he can just call out 4 mules. come on!
Wow, I really, really, really like this idea. The mule mechanic always seemed bad because it doesn't penalize bad players as much as it should. If I miss 1 round of inject when i'm macroing off 4 base I might as well GG cause i'll instantly fall too far behind to compete.
|
United Arab Emirates492 Posts
On September 04 2010 10:25 EAGER-beaver wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2010 12:25 techtron wrote:
Mule should have a 30 second cool down, If i miss an inject with a queen, i dont get that larve but if a terran misses it, he can just call out 4 mules. come on! Wow, I really, really, really like this idea. The mule mechanic always seemed bad because it doesn't penalize bad players as much as it should. If I miss 1 round of inject when i'm macroing off 4 base I might as well GG cause i'll instantly fall too far behind to compete.
^This: or atleast 10-15sec cooldown
+ reduce preignite dmg to light,
+ reduce PF splash dmg
+ reduce viking range
+ reduce marauder stim attack rate
+ remove autorepair
+ remove tank smart firing
Zerg change:
+reduce spinecrawler build time
+make queen spawn with 35energey rather then 25
^_^ what do you think?
|
United Arab Emirates333 Posts
|
if this patch doesnt significantly affect gameplay I think im done playing zerg. which is very very sad to me.
|
Starcraft 2 Balance
I will make no arguments. I'll just let you decide for yourself.
What would you rather have: SCV, probe, or drone?
What would you rather have: Terran complete wall in, Protoss almost wall in, or Zergling lack of wall in?
What would you rather have: turrets, photon cannons, or spore crawlers?
What would you rather have: marines, zealots, or zerglings?
What would you rather have: marauders, stalkers, or roaches?
What would you rather have: reapers, sentries, or banelings?
What would you rather have: hellions, or... uh... nevermind.
What would you rather have: starport+factory tech units (siege, thor, viking, banshee) or lair units (hydralisk, mutalisk, infestor, nydus)?
What would you rather have: medivacs, void prisms, or overlords with ventral sacs?
What would you rather have: scanner sweep + instant supply, chrono boost, or spawn creep + transfusion?
What would you rather have: pylon fields for warping in, creep for increased speed, or the ability to build wherever you want?
Starcraft 2 Balance: How often did you choose the Zerg option?
|
Interestingly when you look @ TvZ in BW, The most standard opening was the muta harass opening either 2 or 3 hatch mutas. This forced the terran to play defensively. terran has to put up atleast 7 turrets and sometimes 10 or as much as 12. The terran couldnt move out until the muta threat was neutralized.
Interestingly in contrast in sc2, the roles have reversed and the terran is the one who has the early harass unit in the reaper.Tthe zerg has to play defensively early and defend against the harass unit. interesting I think
I think the main problem and all the whining from zerg stems from this, that the zerg can no longer get off a strong muta harass with stacked mutas and get an economic lead or just end the game there, like they could in bw. Zerg players in BW were not very creative and I think thats why they have not been able to come up with a defined method of stopping the reaper harass in sc2. I think the game is balanced, the zergs just are going to have to think outside to box to create a solution for themselves.
|
On September 04 2010 16:15 911insidejob wrote:
Interestingly when you look @ TvZ in BW, The most standard opening was the muta harass opening either 2 or 3 hatch mutas. This forced the terran to play defensively. terran has to put up atleast 7 turrets and sometimes 10 or as much as 12. The terran couldnt move out until the muta threat was neutralized.
Interestingly in contrast in sc2, the roles have reversed and the terran is the one who has the early harass unit in the reaper.Tthe zerg has to play defensively early and defend against the harass unit. interesting I think
I think the main problem and all the whining from zerg stems from this, that the zerg can no longer get off a strong muta harass with stacked mutas and get an economic lead or just end the game there, like they could in bw. Zerg players in BW were not very creative and I think thats why they have not been able to come up with a defined method of stopping the reaper harass in sc2. I think the game is balanced, the zergs just are going to have to think outside to box to create a solution for themselves.
think outside the box? how many units do zerg have compared to T?
we have less units and less cost effective units, our units do not promote creativity.
look at it like this, when the lovely 5rax reaper harrass starts(this months flavour for T players) zerg has these units available to stop it.
zerglings= which melt to and group of 10+reapers
roaches = which are kited horrendously
queens= out ranged and kited as well
spine crawlers = which get 1 shotted in 1 volley to a pack of reapers.
tell me how can we be creative using those units? sure we can try to hide some zerglings and try to flank them, but wait then we wont have much at the front, so they die, and then your flanking zerglings die, then you nat dies.
ooo i know, lets try quick tech to lair!!!! oh wait, but thats not solving the problem of 10+ reapers hammering our front door.
how about moar queens!!!! hmmm yeah great idea, that way we have more stuff to get kited and our lair tech is extremely delayed so we will inevitable die to the next MM push!
the balls in your court, how can we be creative with those 4 units?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
