|
On April 13 2011 17:08 Denzil wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2011 16:47 hugman wrote:On April 13 2011 16:28 Kyuki wrote:On April 13 2011 16:00 darkscream wrote:On April 13 2011 15:55 sniverty wrote:
[
well then it's time to ask ourselves why zerg is getting owned by protoss. Maybe zergs need a new kind of playstyle? We know protoss is susceptible to drop harass. Why can't we abandon the whole idea of massing roaches and corruptors and instead engage the enemy indirectly? Even without the colossus, it's pretty damn hard for zerg to engage a protoss army head on, thanks to force fields. Which is why things like hydra/baneling drops, contaminates, nydus networks, aggresive creep spread for map control are all better options than sitting in your base and spamming roaches till maxed. This may feel like the zerg having to massively outplay the toss to win, but what if it becomes the norm? Because when the toss sees you've wasted gas and money on drops and units to drop, they're going to take their death ball and kill your base, and you'll have nothing to stop it. You can't harass someone to death as Zerg. You need to harass but also win army vs army engagements. You can't win massive army vs army engagements, so you must force your opponent to split his army but that's hard. That's why Zerg is in the state its in - you can do all this cool tricky harass with muta/drops/nydus but at the end of the day there's nothing stopping him from a+moving into your main where all your tech is. Can you imagine a situation where a zerg player gets to a+move their army into a Terran or Protoss base? I can't, unless the game was already over. This is one of the main issues zergs have. You're so deep in the imba shit that you can't even see the vulnerabilities of protoss and terran. A good example is IdrA vs MC in Metal at Dreamhack last night. IdrA had the game won with his midgame roach/hydra/ling preassure had he just gone again with the reinforcement roaches, but he backed off, droned up his third and waited for toss to get back up to 170+ food. He overestimated the protoss army when he could've just A+moved into him and won. He was NEVER in a position to just a-move and win. Go rewatch the game. Instead of thinking if the matchup is broken, think if Z could be stronger in ZvP without breaking the matchup. IMO Z could be a lot stronger. In a 200/200 battle P should be stronger, but should they be able to kill an entire Z army and only drop 25 food? It's kinda silly, you have to admit. To a-move and win IdrA would of had to march 20 / 25 Hydras off creep into MCs natural. Do you know how big a commitment that is? When you take Hydras off creep you are saying if this shit doesn't work, they aren't coming back.
Instead of all this giant army a-move, why didn't Idra send 8 lings to harass the probes at the 3rd? Why do you think marching a full army into it is the only way to do damage?
Idra never once used lings to harass or delay MC's 3rd or 4th. Lings run super fast and are really cheap in both minerals and food.
|
On April 13 2011 17:06 MrBitter wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2011 17:03 eviltomahawk wrote:On April 13 2011 16:53 Kylig wrote:
The big question is really, is it reasonable to demand all this from Z when P just need to sit in base and a-move out? Is that balance? And yet, when the Protoss deathball does eventually get "solved," whether it is through a metagame revolution or even a balance patch, how will Protoss respond? Heck, in BW it would be extremely difficult for any race to directly engage a meching Terran. Whereas the Terran could use a lower amount of APM to just siege up his tanks and lay down a few mines, it takes a ton of APM from Zerg players to lay down Dark Swarm and engage the Terran death-ball with reasonable losses. Even Protoss players needed a ton of APM to lay down storms, Zealot bombs, and Arbiter stasis to take out entrenched Terran positions. IMO, when Zerg solves the current Protoss metagame, it will be the Protoss who will be the ones QQing all over the place. Yet, that's how the game works. Certain builds and methods of play become overpowered in the metagame yet eventually get solved over time. Did you even play BW? Terran was the most APM intensive, mechanically demanding race of the three. Hands down, bar none.
I had a feeling that my wording was a bit poor when describing Terran APM.
I guess what I was trying to say is that approaching the Protoss ball is equivalent to approaching an entrenched, critical mass of Terran mech in that it takes significantly more finesse to deal with sieged tanks defended by mines. Players couldn't just a-move into Terran mech. Likewise, players just can't a-move into a Protoss ball, which requires a different, more intensive approach to break it down.
Then again, I'm probably not the most qualified to speak about this.
|
On April 13 2011 17:00 Zzoram wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2011 16:57 Biggun69 wrote:
It doesn't matter how much harras / cute nydras or drops you do, once a Protoss is maxed there is no way a maxed zerg army can beat a maxed Protoss army.
I believe this is a fundamental balance issue. Zerg needs to rely on their ability to resupply but if a protoss is on 3 - 5 bases with 15 gateways then they can resupply almost just as fast. It's not a balance issue that a 200 Protoss army can beat a 200 Zerg army because the Zerg army can be remade faster. Don't let Protoss get to 200. Even if they do, don't let them get to your base. Engage far out with fungals to delay and weaken the army before you do a final engagement. Harass the bases all the time to keep down the probe count. If you do exchange armies, make sure you did harassment of probes simultaneously and engaged far enough out to buy time for the remax. Spinecrawlers also help buy tons of time. Right after an army exchange is the best time for Overseers to go contaminate robos. Small groups of fully upgraded zerglings can harass Protoss bases to death. They are pretty good against even Zealots once upgraded and can kill probes and even cannons quite quickly. Just keep spamming them out to force Protoss to keep spending money on defense.
You obviously have never played zerg. Protoss can resupply pretty much just a quickly as zerg once they have enough bases + gateways. Protoss units are stronger period. A maxed protoss kills a whole zerg army and loses 20 - 30 supply. Then Protoss warps in 10 stalkers and they are nearly maxed again.
|
On April 13 2011 16:47 hugman wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2011 16:28 Kyuki wrote:On April 13 2011 16:00 darkscream wrote:On April 13 2011 15:55 sniverty wrote:
[
well then it's time to ask ourselves why zerg is getting owned by protoss. Maybe zergs need a new kind of playstyle? We know protoss is susceptible to drop harass. Why can't we abandon the whole idea of massing roaches and corruptors and instead engage the enemy indirectly? Even without the colossus, it's pretty damn hard for zerg to engage a protoss army head on, thanks to force fields. Which is why things like hydra/baneling drops, contaminates, nydus networks, aggresive creep spread for map control are all better options than sitting in your base and spamming roaches till maxed. This may feel like the zerg having to massively outplay the toss to win, but what if it becomes the norm? Because when the toss sees you've wasted gas and money on drops and units to drop, they're going to take their death ball and kill your base, and you'll have nothing to stop it. You can't harass someone to death as Zerg. You need to harass but also win army vs army engagements. You can't win massive army vs army engagements, so you must force your opponent to split his army but that's hard. That's why Zerg is in the state its in - you can do all this cool tricky harass with muta/drops/nydus but at the end of the day there's nothing stopping him from a+moving into your main where all your tech is. Can you imagine a situation where a zerg player gets to a+move their army into a Terran or Protoss base? I can't, unless the game was already over. This is one of the main issues zergs have. You're so deep in the imba shit that you can't even see the vulnerabilities of protoss and terran. A good example is IdrA vs MC in Metal at Dreamhack last night. IdrA had the game won with his midgame roach/hydra/ling preassure had he just gone again with the reinforcement roaches, but he backed off, droned up his third and waited for toss to get back up to 170+ food. He overestimated the protoss army when he could've just A+moved into him and won. He was NEVER in a position to just a-move and win. Go rewatch the game. Instead of thinking if the matchup is broken, think if Z could be stronger in ZvP without breaking the matchup. IMO Z could be a lot stronger. In a 200/200 battle P should be stronger, but should they be able to kill an entire Z army and only drop 25 food? It's kinda silly, you have to admit.
Rofl, I'd suggest you do the same. Watch the game again, and tell me that Toss wouldnt loose 9/10 times just from the roaches that should've flooded in. At around 16:15 mins into the game IdrA had 172 food vs 109 of MC. MC had 0 sentries, 2 colossi (one that was practically dead) and 7 stalkers adding a couple of sentires (2 FFs) and had almost 2 immortals coming out. At that point IdrA had _35_ roaches (with burrow movement) and 3 hydras with 6 corrupters inc...
I mean had he just gone for a bumrush and hit his head against MC and pounded on the toss army it would've been so small that it couldnt hold any type of reinforcement if it hadnt just outright killed him with what he had. I just can't for the love of my life understand how you can't see that...
|
On April 13 2011 17:12 Biggun69 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2011 17:00 Zzoram wrote:On April 13 2011 16:57 Biggun69 wrote:
It doesn't matter how much harras / cute nydras or drops you do, once a Protoss is maxed there is no way a maxed zerg army can beat a maxed Protoss army.
I believe this is a fundamental balance issue. Zerg needs to rely on their ability to resupply but if a protoss is on 3 - 5 bases with 15 gateways then they can resupply almost just as fast. It's not a balance issue that a 200 Protoss army can beat a 200 Zerg army because the Zerg army can be remade faster. Don't let Protoss get to 200. Even if they do, don't let them get to your base. Engage far out with fungals to delay and weaken the army before you do a final engagement. Harass the bases all the time to keep down the probe count. If you do exchange armies, make sure you did harassment of probes simultaneously and engaged far enough out to buy time for the remax. Spinecrawlers also help buy tons of time. Right after an army exchange is the best time for Overseers to go contaminate robos. Small groups of fully upgraded zerglings can harass Protoss bases to death. They are pretty good against even Zealots once upgraded and can kill probes and even cannons quite quickly. Just keep spamming them out to force Protoss to keep spending money on defense. You obviously have never played zerg. Protoss can resupply pretty much just a quickly as zerg once they have enough bases + gateways. Protoss units are stronger period. A maxed protoss kills a whole zerg army and loses 20 - 30 supply. Then Protoss warps in 10 stalkers and they are nearly maxed again.
Based on his posts on another forum, it doesn't appear he plays the game at all and is just a spectator. Yes, this is the level of advice pro zerg players should be heeding
|
On April 13 2011 17:11 eviltomahawk wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2011 17:06 MrBitter wrote:On April 13 2011 17:03 eviltomahawk wrote:On April 13 2011 16:53 Kylig wrote:
The big question is really, is it reasonable to demand all this from Z when P just need to sit in base and a-move out? Is that balance? And yet, when the Protoss deathball does eventually get "solved," whether it is through a metagame revolution or even a balance patch, how will Protoss respond? Heck, in BW it would be extremely difficult for any race to directly engage a meching Terran. Whereas the Terran could use a lower amount of APM to just siege up his tanks and lay down a few mines, it takes a ton of APM from Zerg players to lay down Dark Swarm and engage the Terran death-ball with reasonable losses. Even Protoss players needed a ton of APM to lay down storms, Zealot bombs, and Arbiter stasis to take out entrenched Terran positions. IMO, when Zerg solves the current Protoss metagame, it will be the Protoss who will be the ones QQing all over the place. Yet, that's how the game works. Certain builds and methods of play become overpowered in the metagame yet eventually get solved over time. Did you even play BW? Terran was the most APM intensive, mechanically demanding race of the three. Hands down, bar none. I had a feeling that my wording was a bit poor when describing Terran APM. I guess what I was trying to say is that approaching the Protoss ball is equivalent to approaching an entrenched, critical mass of Terran mech in that it takes significantly more finesse to deal with sieged tanks defended by mines. Players couldn't just a-move into Terran mech. Likewise, players just can't a-move into a Protoss ball, which requires a different, more intensive approach to break it down. Then again, I'm probably not the most qualified to speak about this.
To be fair, I might have jumped on you prematurely.
That said, I don't think you can compare the Toss deathball to a Terran siege line.
You're absolutely right. In BW, it was pretty damn stupid to attack through a minefield into vultures and siege tanks. That said, a static siege line didn't really pose much of a direct threat to you. For it to do damage to you directly, it had to unsiege, clear mines, and then move. This takes time, it takes lots and looots of APM to be done effeciently, and it exposes the Terran player to attack.
This is not the case of the SC2 Protoss. The deathball is mobile. The deathball is as dangerous while its moving as it is while its static. And manuevering the deathball is neither APM intensive, nor is it mechanically demanding.
These are two entirely different animals, and your comparison isn't cutting it in my eyes...
|
Yeah, Idra could have probably overwhelmed him after his first Roach-Push.
After that the game was actually pretty much over and/or Idra played it wrong (the whole game focused on the top side of the map wile MC was taking "his" side)...
|
On April 13 2011 16:44 Gotmog wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2011 16:32 Zzoram wrote:On April 13 2011 16:28 Gotmog wrote:On April 13 2011 16:21 Aequos wrote:On April 13 2011 16:08 Defacer wrote:
Imagine if Toss whined all day about not having any viable anti-air in the late game, that phoenixes were good in the mid game but too weak and void rays were too frail and slow.
All the Zergs would whisper, "Try building some fucking carriers. They have the highest range and DPS in the game."
And then, instead of trying to find a viable build to get to carriers, the Toss whined about how expensive they are, how they take forever, et cetera et cetera.
The SOTG hosts are right. There are a plethora of unique abilities that the Zerg have that are under-used. Maybe instead of complaining about how difficult it is to actually exploit these abilities, Zerg's should rethink their approach to the game, so they can create situations where they can exploit these abilities.
I actually like this analogy. Toss anti-air is kind of bad, but we work around it by not letting the Zerg get the 50 muta ball it ideally wants by either: 1) 6-gating to kill them if they tried to go muta-ling or 2) Making them spend gas on non-muta units. It's a wrong analogy. Not a single zerg unit is left unexplored. If there is, please make an example. Overlord dropping of hydras, lings and blings hasn't been fully explored. Dropping blings on workers seems like a low cost no brainer with potentially huge payoff, it's like a reaver drop, but it's still pretty much never done. What are people spending their 400apm on? Hydras haven't been explored ? They have been dropped on clifs like LT, idra has won games with them (they are all in, and must hit before 1st colossus i think), they have been used as harass late game. Lings/blings drops haven't been used enough ? Really !? even i use them in my games, they are good. And they are used a lot. Blings are used on mineral lines on regular basis. However, they literaly can't harm protoss units when they come to defend. Nydus hasn't been done so much, but is it rly the only possible answer to P/T A moves (or tank/bunker possitioning) ? That in itself would be pathetic. I myself have dropped playing zerg, it has became like playing with a handicap, and right now i am enjoying much more stable games. I leave it to pros to keep fixing the race, it's damn to hard to play for low-masters and less. (all i can reliably say).
These are the kind of players that IdrA inspires. Quitters.
The funny thing is that IdrA probably has a 60% win record against Toss. He essentially 5-2'ed Huk at MLG, if you count the game he sabotaged himself in.
IdrA can't blame his recent 'streak' of losses against Protoss on balance. He can only blame himself for being a moron.
The reality is that every game he's ever lost against Toss was winnable. He didn't lose a game because he didn't make enough corruptors, or he made too many corrupters, or whatever. He probably lost 10 minutes earlier when he let a Toss get a third base uncontested, or didn't harass five minutes earlier, etc.
IdrA is a really, REALLY good player. But he plays a race passively which isn't necessarily meant to be played passively. Zerg has burrow movement, contaminate, ovie drops, creep spread, mutas and nyduses. All these things are designed to facilitate harass, contain and limit an opponents growth. But can we honestly say that all Zergs approach the game this way?
|
[QUOTE]On April 13 2011 17:00 MrBitter wrote:
[QUOTE]On April 13 2011 16:56 jmbthirteen wrote:
[QUOTE]On April 13 2011 16:46 Biggun69 wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +On April 13 2011 16:39 jmbthirteen wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2011 16:28 Gotmog wrote:On April 13 2011 16:21 Aequos wrote:On April 13 2011 16:08 Defacer wrote:
Imagine if Toss whined all day about not having any viable anti-air in the late game, that phoenixes were good in the mid game but too weak and void rays were too frail and slow.
All the Zergs would whisper, "Try building some fucking carriers. They have the highest range and DPS in the game."
And then, instead of trying to find a viable build to get to carriers, the Toss whined about how expensive they are, how they take forever, et cetera et cetera.
The SOTG hosts are right. There are a plethora of unique abilities that the Zerg have that are under-used. Maybe instead of complaining about how difficult it is to actually exploit these abilities, Zerg's should rethink their approach to the game, so they can create situations where they can exploit these abilities.
I actually like this analogy. Toss anti-air is kind of bad, but we work around it by not letting the Zerg get the 50 muta ball it ideally wants by either: 1) 6-gating to kill them if they tried to go muta-ling or 2) Making them spend gas on non-muta units. It's a wrong analogy. Not a single zerg unit is left unexplored. If there is, please make an example.
[quote]Yet there are plenty of unit combinations still to be explored.
Oh really? Why don't you enlighten us?[/QUOTE]
Umm do you really think every Zerg unit combination has been explored?
[/QUOTE]
Zerg was what? 9 fighting units? I don't think there's a whole lot of argument here.... We have tried every possible combination. Right now we don't have answers to certain Protoss armies.
That doesn't mean we can't win ZvP... It just means that eventually there's no way to kill the Protoss army in a heads up fight.[/QUOTE]
Yes Zerg only has 9 fighting units, but there are a lot of combinations still to be tried. Dont look at it as a singular unit. Look at if for compositions. There are still options out there, whether they consist of 2,3,4,5 different units, I don't know. But they exist. Sure a lot will be ridiculous, but there are still ones that will be discovered to be rather strong. Like Day9 said, players need to think outside the box and come up with some ridiculous compositions. And if its failing bad, you actually might be close to figuring something out, just a small change needs to be made. The race is far from being figured out. Not long ago we were seeing threads about how the hydra is useless, yet now we are seeing more and more players use it,
|
On April 13 2011 17:23 Defacer wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2011 16:44 Gotmog wrote:On April 13 2011 16:32 Zzoram wrote:On April 13 2011 16:28 Gotmog wrote:On April 13 2011 16:21 Aequos wrote:On April 13 2011 16:08 Defacer wrote:
Imagine if Toss whined all day about not having any viable anti-air in the late game, that phoenixes were good in the mid game but too weak and void rays were too frail and slow.
All the Zergs would whisper, "Try building some fucking carriers. They have the highest range and DPS in the game."
And then, instead of trying to find a viable build to get to carriers, the Toss whined about how expensive they are, how they take forever, et cetera et cetera.
The SOTG hosts are right. There are a plethora of unique abilities that the Zerg have that are under-used. Maybe instead of complaining about how difficult it is to actually exploit these abilities, Zerg's should rethink their approach to the game, so they can create situations where they can exploit these abilities.
I actually like this analogy. Toss anti-air is kind of bad, but we work around it by not letting the Zerg get the 50 muta ball it ideally wants by either: 1) 6-gating to kill them if they tried to go muta-ling or 2) Making them spend gas on non-muta units. It's a wrong analogy. Not a single zerg unit is left unexplored. If there is, please make an example. Overlord dropping of hydras, lings and blings hasn't been fully explored. Dropping blings on workers seems like a low cost no brainer with potentially huge payoff, it's like a reaver drop, but it's still pretty much never done. What are people spending their 400apm on? Hydras haven't been explored ? They have been dropped on clifs like LT, idra has won games with them (they are all in, and must hit before 1st colossus i think), they have been used as harass late game. Lings/blings drops haven't been used enough ? Really !? even i use them in my games, they are good. And they are used a lot. Blings are used on mineral lines on regular basis. However, they literaly can't harm protoss units when they come to defend. Nydus hasn't been done so much, but is it rly the only possible answer to P/T A moves (or tank/bunker possitioning) ? That in itself would be pathetic. I myself have dropped playing zerg, it has became like playing with a handicap, and right now i am enjoying much more stable games. I leave it to pros to keep fixing the race, it's damn to hard to play for low-masters and less. (all i can reliably say). These are the kind of players that IdrA inspires. Quitters. The funny thing is that IdrA probably has a 60% win record against Toss. He essentially 5-2'ed Huk at MLG, if you count the game he sabotaged himself in. IdrA can't blame his recent 'streak' of losses against Protoss on balance. He can only blame himself for being a moron. The reality is that every game he's ever lost against Toss was winnable. He didn't lose a game because he didn't make enough corruptors, or he made too many corrupters, or whatever. He probably lost 10 minutes earlier when he let a Toss get a third base uncontested, or didn't harass five minutes earlier, etc. IdrA is a really, REALLY good player. But he plays a race passively which isn't necessarily meant to be played passively. Zerg has burrow movement, contaminate, ovie drops, creep spread, mutas and nyduses. All these things are designed to facilitate harass, contain and limit an opponents growth. But can we honestly say that all Zergs approach the game this way?
Don't remember insulting you, but i guess it's fine.
|
On April 11 2011 05:17 flowSthead wrote:I was sent the link to the old thread about international pros and how well zerg does. Here is the link: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=185691¤tpage=AllIf you notice, it was made in January 19, so what I did was look at the links he gave for his data, and then checked in regards to more recent data. I separated the data going backwards based on April 4th to March 1st (basically the month of March) and February 28th to Jan27 (basically the month of February). Here is what I got: March Gold: Terran 39 Protoss 26 Zerg 26 March Silver: Terran 36 Protoss 27 Zerg 27 Random 1 February Gold: Terran 46 Protoss 33 Zerg 23 February Silver: Terran 39 Protoss 38 Zerg 25 So what do we see? In the last month, Zergs have been doing equally as well in tournaments as Protoss, and I mean exactly equally. Terrans have been dominating in all aspects for the last two months, and back a month ago Zergs were doing substantially worse than both races. Admittedly, this has the same weaknesses as before. These are just individual stats of tournaments wins of 1st and 2nd place, not a large amount of statistical data. But if anything, the trend seems to be positive for Zerg, negative for Protoss, and neutral to negative for Terran. Looking back at the original link, I have not had a chance to look at individual winrates of top pros, I will do that a bit later possibly. Edit: If anyone does not trust me or wants to double check, here is the data, I used an excel spreadsheet to count: https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0Asv1-ALiHzT8dE5GYmFyMUI1ZUk0ZzUteERYMS16V2c&hl=en#gid=0And here is where the data came from: http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/sc2-international/individual-leaguesThe first one is 2011 US Go4SC2 Cup #44 Attero MarinekngXPn The last one is 2011 Viking Cup #27 Jimpo elfi
Protoss isn't dominating Zergs. Can we stop saying that just because MC is dominating everyone? The evidence just isn't there.
|
On April 13 2011 16:53 Baituri wrote:
I haven't seen the NASL matches yet, am I going to get spoiled if watch this SOTG or the Preshow?
Yes, especially the results of Artosis's match.
|
On April 13 2011 17:23 Defacer wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2011 16:44 Gotmog wrote:On April 13 2011 16:32 Zzoram wrote:On April 13 2011 16:28 Gotmog wrote:On April 13 2011 16:21 Aequos wrote:On April 13 2011 16:08 Defacer wrote:
Imagine if Toss whined all day about not having any viable anti-air in the late game, that phoenixes were good in the mid game but too weak and void rays were too frail and slow.
All the Zergs would whisper, "Try building some fucking carriers. They have the highest range and DPS in the game."
And then, instead of trying to find a viable build to get to carriers, the Toss whined about how expensive they are, how they take forever, et cetera et cetera.
The SOTG hosts are right. There are a plethora of unique abilities that the Zerg have that are under-used. Maybe instead of complaining about how difficult it is to actually exploit these abilities, Zerg's should rethink their approach to the game, so they can create situations where they can exploit these abilities.
I actually like this analogy. Toss anti-air is kind of bad, but we work around it by not letting the Zerg get the 50 muta ball it ideally wants by either: 1) 6-gating to kill them if they tried to go muta-ling or 2) Making them spend gas on non-muta units. It's a wrong analogy. Not a single zerg unit is left unexplored. If there is, please make an example. Overlord dropping of hydras, lings and blings hasn't been fully explored. Dropping blings on workers seems like a low cost no brainer with potentially huge payoff, it's like a reaver drop, but it's still pretty much never done. What are people spending their 400apm on? Hydras haven't been explored ? They have been dropped on clifs like LT, idra has won games with them (they are all in, and must hit before 1st colossus i think), they have been used as harass late game. Lings/blings drops haven't been used enough ? Really !? even i use them in my games, they are good. And they are used a lot. Blings are used on mineral lines on regular basis. However, they literaly can't harm protoss units when they come to defend. Nydus hasn't been done so much, but is it rly the only possible answer to P/T A moves (or tank/bunker possitioning) ? That in itself would be pathetic. I myself have dropped playing zerg, it has became like playing with a handicap, and right now i am enjoying much more stable games. I leave it to pros to keep fixing the race, it's damn to hard to play for low-masters and less. (all i can reliably say). These are the kind of players that IdrA inspires. Quitters. The funny thing is that IdrA probably has a 60% win record against Toss. He essentially 5-2'ed Huk at MLG, if you count the game he sabotaged himself in. IdrA can't blame his recent 'streak' of losses against Protoss on balance. He can only blame himself for being a moron. The reality is that every game he's ever lost against Toss was winnable. He didn't lose a game because he didn't make enough corruptors, or he made too many corrupters, or whatever. He probably lost 10 minutes earlier when he let a Toss get a third base uncontested, or didn't harass five minutes earlier, etc. IdrA is a really, REALLY good player. But he plays a race passively which isn't necessarily meant to be played passively. Zerg has burrow movement, contaminate, ovie drops, creep spread, mutas and nyduses. All these things are designed to facilitate harass, contain and limit an opponents growth. But can we honestly say that all Zergs approach the game this way?
Haven't you made your point already? Is there a reason you feel the need to continue on, not just criticizing but outright insulting and attacking Idra and his fans?
|
when will it be uploaded? ^_^
|
is there an mp3 of today's show floating around yet?
|
Artosis's constantly sparking mic is hurting the inner chambers of my soul. Why can't they just buy some decent hard ware? It's not like a decent mic or web cam is super expensive or anything. It's like 20 dollars for christ sake lol.
Ah well I guess it helps to keep the flimsy SOTG feeling. lolz.
|
On April 13 2011 17:18 MrBitter wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2011 17:11 eviltomahawk wrote:On April 13 2011 17:06 MrBitter wrote:On April 13 2011 17:03 eviltomahawk wrote:On April 13 2011 16:53 Kylig wrote:
The big question is really, is it reasonable to demand all this from Z when P just need to sit in base and a-move out? Is that balance? And yet, when the Protoss deathball does eventually get "solved," whether it is through a metagame revolution or even a balance patch, how will Protoss respond? Heck, in BW it would be extremely difficult for any race to directly engage a meching Terran. Whereas the Terran could use a lower amount of APM to just siege up his tanks and lay down a few mines, it takes a ton of APM from Zerg players to lay down Dark Swarm and engage the Terran death-ball with reasonable losses. Even Protoss players needed a ton of APM to lay down storms, Zealot bombs, and Arbiter stasis to take out entrenched Terran positions. IMO, when Zerg solves the current Protoss metagame, it will be the Protoss who will be the ones QQing all over the place. Yet, that's how the game works. Certain builds and methods of play become overpowered in the metagame yet eventually get solved over time. Did you even play BW? Terran was the most APM intensive, mechanically demanding race of the three. Hands down, bar none. I had a feeling that my wording was a bit poor when describing Terran APM. I guess what I was trying to say is that approaching the Protoss ball is equivalent to approaching an entrenched, critical mass of Terran mech in that it takes significantly more finesse to deal with sieged tanks defended by mines. Players couldn't just a-move into Terran mech. Likewise, players just can't a-move into a Protoss ball, which requires a different, more intensive approach to break it down. Then again, I'm probably not the most qualified to speak about this. To be fair, I might have jumped on you prematurely. That said, I don't think you can compare the Toss deathball to a Terran siege line. You're absolutely right. In BW, it was pretty damn stupid to attack through a minefield into vultures and siege tanks. That said, a static siege line didn't really pose much of a direct threat to you. For it to do damage to you directly, it had to unsiege, clear mines, and then move. This takes time, it takes lots and looots of APM to be done effeciently, and it exposes the Terran player to attack. This is not the case of the SC2 Protoss. The deathball is mobile. The deathball is as dangerous while its moving as it is while its static. And manuevering the deathball is neither APM intensive, nor is it mechanically demanding. These are two entirely different animals, and your comparison isn't cutting it in my eyes...
I guess my analogy was highly inaccurate regarding the mobility and direct threat between Protoss deathballs and Terran mech.
However, I think what I was trying to explain (but probably failing) is that in the case of a static Terran mech army or a mobile Protoss deathball, it definitely will require more APM from the opposing player to break apart both types of armies. In either case, it's extremely difficult to engage, though I do agree that the Protoss deathball is much more immediately threatening. Of course, Terran mech does become weaker and more APM intensive once it is forced to unsiege and become mobile, and I do agree that it becomes a different situation to engage in that regard.
Also, I feel that engaging a Terran siege line is essentially a meticulous science that must require more than simple a-moving. Likewise, I think there should be a more meticulous, more APM-intensive, yet more effective method to engage the Protoss deathball other than a-moving roaches, hydras, lings, and corruptors into the deathball.
Then again, I'm too low level a player to experiment or theorycraft such a method, though I do have hopes that the Protoss deathball is a solvable puzzle.
|
On April 13 2011 17:03 eviltomahawk wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2011 16:53 Kylig wrote:
The big question is really, is it reasonable to demand all this from Z when P just need to sit in base and a-move out? Is that balance? And yet, when the Protoss deathball does eventually get "solved," whether it is through a metagame revolution or even a balance patch, how will Protoss respond? Heck, in BW it would be extremely difficult for any race to directly engage a meching Terran. Whereas the Terran could use a lower amount of APM (edit: this wording was probably REALLY bad) to just siege up his tanks and lay down a few mines, it takes a ton of APM from Zerg players to lay down Dark Swarm and engage the Terran death-ball with reasonable losses. Even Protoss players needed a ton of APM to lay down storms, Zealot bombs, and Arbiter stasis to take out entrenched Terran positions. IMO, when Zerg solves the current Protoss metagame, it will be the Protoss who will be the ones QQing all over the place. Yet, that's how the game works. Certain builds and methods of play become overpowered in the metagame yet eventually get solved over time.
They'll use the fact that they have more than 2 good units and more than 1 tech option to adjust their meta-game and adapt.
|
Argh JP wheres the upload : (
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
