|
On April 14 2011 05:51 Wrongspeedy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2011 05:39 Treehead wrote:On April 14 2011 04:28 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
I think Day[9] is skipping a step when he is saying "get a ton of infestors etc" when the etc includes a bunch of stuff that also costs significant amounts of gas. It'd be easier to start with my suggestion of getting 7th and 8th gas up ASAP and seeing how it shifts your composition naturally, having that 33% extra gas. It's absolutely true that fully saturating a 4th base is of questionable helpfulness due to supply cap but saturating more gases hasn't been explored enough.
Finding out efficient ways to dump the units that don't fit into your 200/200 composition is important as well. I don't mind zergs sticking to a roach heavy composition on their way to getting their 8th gas and 200/200, but they ought to drop or nydus the roaches into a somewhat effective, econ attacking or time buying maneuver, when it's time for those roaches to die to free up supply. We Protoss had to do this a ton in SC1, usually getting a ton of zealots at some point out of absolute necessity, but knowing we would die if we hit 200/200 and sat at 200/200 for more than 30 seconds with a zealot heavy composition. So we dumped them the best way we could. Sometimes in really inefficient ways... but hopefully if they died without killing anything, they were at least buying time. I think it's rather telling that in the last page people have spent the last page arguing about whether nydus, and the suggestion of nydus, is stupid, rather than discussing this thought by Tyler. It seems like day9 is trying to suggest that without midgame units (except queens), you can delay or repel any early pushes. I can't imagine how you would deal with long range units like tanks in the midgame, though - before you can get brood lords. It's funday monday, so it should be fun to watch at least, but I believe Tyler's suggestion is more sensible in terms of overall gameplay (admittedly, Day9's suggestion would lead to more silly-looking games). Is it possible Day believes Brood Lords are reachable before tanks can kill you? Or was the mass infestor/queen shenanigans something specifically for PvZ? He's just trying to get people to use the units they don't use... more... Its not that complicated. You can start by goofing around and having fun (its a game) or you could be serious and just get your army then tech switch. It doesn't matter how you do it, only that you do it a lot and get good at it. Eventually you will find a way to win (who likes losing) and thats a good place to start. I think the issue people have with zerg is it feels like you have 4 different units all game. Ling/Roach/Hydra/AA done. Most people live and die by those units. The more people find clever ways to incorporate the other units into their builds the more other people will use them and people will be forced to react. One Perfect example someone pointed out in this thread (not on purpose cause he is a troll) Protoss players almost always have plyons around the edge of their base. Hrm I wonder why? Could it be because people used nydus worms in the Beta and Protoss players quickly learned, or watched Beta tournys (like day9's) where it was obvious that they needed to put pylons everywhere to stop nydus worms. Casters even were even pointing it out. Sure it helps you warp in units in some locations, but honestly its dangerous to put your pylons around the edge of your base. If your opponent goes air they are easily picked off and ground armies with sight love to pick off Terran and Protoss structures around the edge of bases.
He was discussing the timing of additional gas, and the suggested composition while getting that gas. The balance in the early game can be tenuous against rushes even with ling/roach/hydra, this is the reason Tyler is suggesting using those while they're necessary (assuming they are). Day, it seems, is suggesting queens and spine/spore crawlers as needed until lair tech and infestation pit are down (which can be fairly fast if u skip ling speed).
Anyway, he definitely said more than "needz moar infestors!" and the fact that this thread is avoiding it seems to imply that people care more about being right about something than they do about the evolution of gameplay.
|
On April 14 2011 05:44 hugman wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2011 05:13 Thetan wrote:On April 14 2011 03:04 hugman wrote:
What bothers me a bit about this balance debate is how arbitrary it feels when we've "just" come off of (can you say that?) the beta. The argument the SotG hosts make could be made regardless of how "balanced" the game actually is (what balanced even means is subject onto its own). What if you reverted all the Zerg nerfs, make Roaches 1 supply, 2 armor, reduce Burrow research time to its old 50 secs and on and on? Zergs would start owning Protosses, but the argument you're using now wasn't made in the beta. Reverse the roles the other direction, what if Protoss were killing Zergs during the beta the way they are now, do you think Blizzard wouldn't patch it? Or why weren't you you saying "you should keep dropping his main and killing the Roach Warren so he can't get any Roaches" or something like that during the beta?
Do you see how arbitrary it is now? Why even patch anything? Just throw the units in and be done. Leave it all for the players to figure out, and if one year later they haven't, well then I guess you wasted a year of people's time.
If you refuse to evaluate balance based on the current metagame then how can you say that the current SC2 release is better than any random beta version? Blizzard were patching every week! There was no time to truly explore the balance. Again, my point is, what if you undo every single nerf to the Roach and Zergs start owning everyone, how could you justify nerfing it? Why not try to adapt for 6 months or more? What is the definition of "balance"? From listening to the discussion on SotG, you'll know that having "un-winnable" situations doesn't not imply "imbalance". It is only "imbalanced" if you could not do anything to prevent the "un-winnable" situation from occuring. The old roach, old mass reaper builds against zerg, those were "imbalanced": they created un-winnable situations so *early* in the game that it was clear that there was nothing that could be done to prevent those un-winnable situations from occurring (or that the only things that could be done led to an un-winnable situation against any other strategy). Whereas, the "un-winnable situation" talk right now focuses mostly on *lategame* compositions. Until you can show that it is impossible to prevent that un-winnable situation, you cannot claim "imbalance". And that has not yet been shown, as the possibilities of reactions grows exponentially as time increases. You can say that zergs have tried everything vs. the 5-rax reaper rush, and that nothing worked. Because by that time so early in the game, there's only a handful of possible strategies to try. You cannot say that zergs have tried everything vs. late-game protoss/terran. Because by that time, there's millions of strategies that you could've tried to prevent that un-winnable lategame situation. That's a lot of absolute statements all of a sudden. You say the old Roaches were imbalanced like it's a fact. In the first month of the beta Force Field usage was nowhere near as developed as it is today (also don't forget Roaches only had 3 range), and the problem with Roaches was actually when you got a huge amount of them with Organic Carapace (which required Hive). Still, Brood Lords were hit by the nerfbat in the beta too, and they are a very late game unit. I wasn't even talking about unwinnable situations anyway, my point was that we don't know if Roaches were imbalanced any more than we know if P is overpowered. Maybe you could deal with them, maybe you couldn't. Either you try to balance the game or you don't. You can't argue that it's okay to discuss balance, and then arbitrarily switch over to "practice more"-mode. In the beta everyone was constantly discussing what should be changed, but as soon as the game hit retail it's like nothing should be changed. Sure, the stakes are higher with so many tournaments, but Blizzard releasing the game at a date set months in advance doesn't mean that the balancing was mostly done at that point.
The thing is, we don't know if the roaches with 1 supply and 2 armor would be overpowered. However, we also don't know if the mothership with the Purifier Beam/Time Stop/Wormhole Transit would be OP. The thing is, if they were in the game, we shouldn't seek Blizzard fixing them, but instead we should learn to work around that issue (Protoss might be forced into heavy immortal play, Terran might be forced to go Marauder/Tank if the roaches were still around).
|
On April 14 2011 06:03 Aequos wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2011 05:44 hugman wrote:On April 14 2011 05:13 Thetan wrote:On April 14 2011 03:04 hugman wrote:
What bothers me a bit about this balance debate is how arbitrary it feels when we've "just" come off of (can you say that?) the beta. The argument the SotG hosts make could be made regardless of how "balanced" the game actually is (what balanced even means is subject onto its own). What if you reverted all the Zerg nerfs, make Roaches 1 supply, 2 armor, reduce Burrow research time to its old 50 secs and on and on? Zergs would start owning Protosses, but the argument you're using now wasn't made in the beta. Reverse the roles the other direction, what if Protoss were killing Zergs during the beta the way they are now, do you think Blizzard wouldn't patch it? Or why weren't you you saying "you should keep dropping his main and killing the Roach Warren so he can't get any Roaches" or something like that during the beta?
Do you see how arbitrary it is now? Why even patch anything? Just throw the units in and be done. Leave it all for the players to figure out, and if one year later they haven't, well then I guess you wasted a year of people's time.
If you refuse to evaluate balance based on the current metagame then how can you say that the current SC2 release is better than any random beta version? Blizzard were patching every week! There was no time to truly explore the balance. Again, my point is, what if you undo every single nerf to the Roach and Zergs start owning everyone, how could you justify nerfing it? Why not try to adapt for 6 months or more? What is the definition of "balance"? From listening to the discussion on SotG, you'll know that having "un-winnable" situations doesn't not imply "imbalance". It is only "imbalanced" if you could not do anything to prevent the "un-winnable" situation from occuring. The old roach, old mass reaper builds against zerg, those were "imbalanced": they created un-winnable situations so *early* in the game that it was clear that there was nothing that could be done to prevent those un-winnable situations from occurring (or that the only things that could be done led to an un-winnable situation against any other strategy). Whereas, the "un-winnable situation" talk right now focuses mostly on *lategame* compositions. Until you can show that it is impossible to prevent that un-winnable situation, you cannot claim "imbalance". And that has not yet been shown, as the possibilities of reactions grows exponentially as time increases. You can say that zergs have tried everything vs. the 5-rax reaper rush, and that nothing worked. Because by that time so early in the game, there's only a handful of possible strategies to try. You cannot say that zergs have tried everything vs. late-game protoss/terran. Because by that time, there's millions of strategies that you could've tried to prevent that un-winnable lategame situation. That's a lot of absolute statements all of a sudden. You say the old Roaches were imbalanced like it's a fact. In the first month of the beta Force Field usage was nowhere near as developed as it is today (also don't forget Roaches only had 3 range), and the problem with Roaches was actually when you got a huge amount of them with Organic Carapace (which required Hive). Still, Brood Lords were hit by the nerfbat in the beta too, and they are a very late game unit. I wasn't even talking about unwinnable situations anyway, my point was that we don't know if Roaches were imbalanced any more than we know if P is overpowered. Maybe you could deal with them, maybe you couldn't. Either you try to balance the game or you don't. You can't argue that it's okay to discuss balance, and then arbitrarily switch over to "practice more"-mode. In the beta everyone was constantly discussing what should be changed, but as soon as the game hit retail it's like nothing should be changed. Sure, the stakes are higher with so many tournaments, but Blizzard releasing the game at a date set months in advance doesn't mean that the balancing was mostly done at that point. The thing is, we don't know if the roaches with 1 supply and 2 armor would be overpowered. However, we also don't know if the mothership with the Purifier Beam/Time Stop/Wormhole Transit would be OP. The thing is, if they were in the game, we shouldn't seek Blizzard fixing them, but instead we should learn to work around that issue (Protoss might be forced into heavy immortal play, Terran might be forced to go Marauder/Tank if the roaches were still around).
I know, I understand, my issue is that we DID ask Blizzard to fix things, but now it's suddenly not okay. Why is now the time to just let the game be and figure it out over the next five years, why not after the next two balance patches, or before the last five?
|
On April 14 2011 04:28 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
I think Day[9] is skipping a step when he is saying "get a ton of infestors etc" when the etc includes a bunch of stuff that also costs significant amounts of gas. It'd be easier to start with my suggestion of getting 7th and 8th gas up ASAP and seeing how it shifts your composition naturally, having that 33% extra gas. It's absolutely true that fully saturating a 4th base is of questionable helpfulness due to supply cap but saturating more gases hasn't been explored enough.
Finding out efficient ways to dump the units that don't fit into your 200/200 composition is important as well. I don't mind zergs sticking to a roach heavy composition on their way to getting their 8th gas and 200/200, but they ought to drop or nydus the roaches into a somewhat effective, econ attacking or time buying maneuver, when it's time for those roaches to die to free up supply. We Protoss had to do this a ton in SC1, usually getting a ton of zealots at some point out of absolute necessity, but knowing we would die if we hit 200/200 and sat at 200/200 for more than 30 seconds with a zealot heavy composition. So we dumped them the best way we could. Sometimes in really inefficient ways... but hopefully if they died without killing anything, they were at least buying time.
I think deciding what to remax with is one of the biggest difficulties with Zerg. You have to have a standing army, but if roach/hydra isn't it....then what is? A lot of zerg's already do this to some extent to get broodlords, but you need an army to protect them still. Is it broodlord/corruptor/infestor? Broodlord/infestor/hydra? Or is it just something Zerg's have to experiment with more? Remaxing with 10 infestors and 8 broods isn't very realistic since you need like 2500+ gas stockpiled, which means it has to be a more gradual process.
|
The only thing that I don't like, is that:
Terran have trouble against some protoss builds : they devise a build that works very well against it and it works. They do it in two weeks. Two weeks for instance the heavy upgrade has been very very scary to terrans. They had an answer in two weeks. A few builds that would kill the toss making that straight up no question. Same for protoss.
For zergs. Well first they have trouble against a lot of different builds. a lot. And then they have this problem for a month (I mean look at the double rax for TvZ, pros still have trouble against some of those openings). And when they find a solution, it doesn't kill straight up the opponent. It just allows them to survive.
It's not fine for terrans and protoss to be able to open the way they want, zerg responds perfectly do the well devised build to answer it. But Terran and Toss are still fine and are able to change a few little things and still do pretty well.
It doesn't work that way for TvT, PvT, PvP or even ZvZ. Hell for PvP it's even at a point where it's almost like if you don't 4 gate you're dead.
Things change, builds change. But if you don't have an answer that straight up kill a "bad" or "outdated" build, then you are facing a brick wall. You can't prepare against everything just hoping to survive. You need to prepare a build to kill. "Scenarios where you win" as Tyler said. But Zerg don't have them. They have mostly scenarios where you survive.
And no it's not a case of "Zerg players are bad". Look at the hydra bust with spines that IDra has and is the only one to do. It works against some situation it's a counter example. But are protoss abandoning their builds just because it exists? Are terrans stopping their 2rax fast expand because July and Morrow can beat it in some situation with baneling busts? No. Is that situation happening for the other matchups: yeah.
And to conclude: if that continues on, zergs will have to prepare against so many builds while the other races reduce zerg options the more the game goes on.
It's the feeling I have for very long about the game.
|
On April 14 2011 05:44 hugman wrote:
Either you try to balance the game or you don't. You can't argue that it's okay to discuss balance, and then arbitrarily switch over to "practice more"-mode. In the beta everyone was constantly discussing what should be changed, but as soon as the game hit retail it's like nothing should be changed. Sure, the stakes are higher with so many tournaments, but Blizzard releasing the game at a date set months in advance doesn't mean that the balancing was mostly done at that point.
The purpose of having a public Beta is to give the game enough play hours, especially by high level players. Players often have misconceptions about public Beta (and this is the case in nearly every modern game). It's not so much a "we want people to test this game and give us their opinions on what is wrong with it", it's more of "we need this game to be played by thousands of different players so we, the developers, can see things that are wrong with it".
So the balance discussion during beta was just as superficial and pointless as it is now. But because it was a "beta testing phase", people somehow figured that it was all about them having their opinion on balance matter. No. It really wasn't.
The point is - players should always be in the "practice more" mode (or just "play more" if you're a casual gamer). They should've been in practice mode before the Roach nerf and before the VR nerf as well.
Nobody is conclusively saying that everything is fine and no balance changes need to happen anymore after beta or after any other point in time. What a lot of people here (as well as guys on SoTG) are trying to point out is that balance is basically none of our business and getting upset or complaining about it is a waste of everybody's time.
Player's job is to solve problems in the game, not outside of it.
|
I am listening now and this cast is the most depressing thing ever  I hope everyone has a better week next week!
|
United States22883 Posts
I decided to reread Ver's guide on How to Improve and there's a couple of choice quotes I want to point out.
IV. "I know what to do I can't just execute it"
The better one understands any complex activity, the more they realize how much more they have to
grow. Starcraft is no exception, yet there are scores of players who think they somehow have a Flash-
like understanding of the game but just can't move their fi ngers like him. At certain points early on in
comprehension Starcraft can look deceptively simple and will lead players to make dumb limiting beliefs
that only cripple themselves.
There are massive gaps in knowledge between even the very best handful of pros and the majority of
good A-teamers, and the gap is just as wide at every dividing line in skill. Starcraft is simply so complex
and some knowledge can really only be gained through playing it too. Lastly, there is a signifi cant difference
between understanding an idea and truly getting it to the point where they can use that knowledge to react
instantaneously to a new situation. Every good player has both attributes, but the person who complains
about their poor mechanics will never have the latter
The situation has become a bit different in SC2 as the mechanics requirement has eased, but it highlights a pretty important point: You don't understand as much as you think you do.
Hidden Strategies
For another example that eventually did get popular, consider the dominating ZvP strategy of 2009: the Mutalisk transition after producing from 5 Hatch Hydra. This strategy really caught on after the Jaedong/Bisu proleague ace match in December of 2008, but guess when it fi rst started appearing? January and Feburary of 2008, possibly even earlier. Jaedong and Savior both were using it during that period, albeit rarely. Jaedong played with it a few times against weak opponents, then quit using it altogether until one game in July, then mostly ignored it until that important December match. Savior stuck with it almost every game he played, but his lacking play otherwise resulted in very few ZvP's, none versus notable opponents. All of these games were low-profi le, and somehow their ideas didn't get noticed or didn't stick.
If someone had the knowledge and foresight to look at those few games of Jaedong and Savior and say "this idea will singlehandedly flip the balance of ZvP upside down," they would've had a signifi cant advantage over anyone they faced, pro or not. Jaedong himself apparently did not have the full realization of what he had created until nearly a full year later. Even the very best pros often don't get it at first, and losing with a build doesn't mean it can't work.
|
On April 14 2011 06:36 Talin wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2011 05:44 hugman wrote:
Either you try to balance the game or you don't. You can't argue that it's okay to discuss balance, and then arbitrarily switch over to "practice more"-mode. In the beta everyone was constantly discussing what should be changed, but as soon as the game hit retail it's like nothing should be changed. Sure, the stakes are higher with so many tournaments, but Blizzard releasing the game at a date set months in advance doesn't mean that the balancing was mostly done at that point. The purpose of having a public Beta is to give the game enough play hours, especially by high level players. Players often have misconceptions about public Beta (and this is the case in nearly every modern game). It's not so much a "we want people to test this game and give us their opinions on what is wrong with it", it's more of "we need this game to be played by thousands of different players so we, the developers, can see things that are wrong with it".
This is true, but the discussion is about whether or not the community should discuss the balance. Ultimately we don't have much power over what Blizzard does with the game anyway.
|
On April 14 2011 06:55 hugman wrote:
This is true, but the discussion is about whether or not the community should discuss the balance. Ultimately we don't have much power over what Blizzard does with the game anyway.
Well there's your answer then. Why discuss something when absolutely nobody benefits from the discussion (and a lot of people can actually be mislead by it)?
Just play the game as if you never expect any patch to come out ever again. I think it was Sean that said something very similar in the this latest episode when they talked about what it was like in BW.
The overarching point is that nobody can make conclusive statements about game balance that are factually right or wrong. It's just a flurry of unsubstantiated (or insufficiently substantiated) subjective opinions going back and forth anyway.
|
They'll add lurkers back in HotS and Zerg will be fixed.
|
On April 14 2011 07:02 Talin wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2011 06:55 hugman wrote:
This is true, but the discussion is about whether or not the community should discuss the balance. Ultimately we don't have much power over what Blizzard does with the game anyway. Well there's your answer then. Why discuss something when absolutely nobody benefits from the discussion (and a lot of people can actually be mislead by it)? Just play the game as if you never expect any patch to come out ever again. I think it was Sean that said something very similar in the this latest episode when they talked about what it was like in BW. The overarching point is that nobody can make conclusive statements about game balance that are factually right or wrong. It's just a flurry of subjective opinions going back and forth anyway.
blizzard doesn't care about BW, but they certainly do about SC2, there is a difference between the 2.
sure, the experiences of BW can shed some light on SC2, but really, it's BW, and not SC2. that was then and this is now, whatever happened for BW might not ever happen for SC2, no one will know.
what i would hate to have happen is, 6 months or even 1 year from now, zerg is still suffering from this issue.
and a comment on nydus, i think its pretty useless to use offensively as it takes 20 in game seconds to build and then it only has 200hp, just too easy to kill. i think if the opponent allows a worm to pop up in their base, it should be a lot harder to get rid of, as a punishment.
|
They should remove the warning sound for nukes and nydus. Just have the text prompt.
|
On April 14 2011 06:27 Tachion wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2011 04:28 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
I think Day[9] is skipping a step when he is saying "get a ton of infestors etc" when the etc includes a bunch of stuff that also costs significant amounts of gas. It'd be easier to start with my suggestion of getting 7th and 8th gas up ASAP and seeing how it shifts your composition naturally, having that 33% extra gas. It's absolutely true that fully saturating a 4th base is of questionable helpfulness due to supply cap but saturating more gases hasn't been explored enough.
Finding out efficient ways to dump the units that don't fit into your 200/200 composition is important as well. I don't mind zergs sticking to a roach heavy composition on their way to getting their 8th gas and 200/200, but they ought to drop or nydus the roaches into a somewhat effective, econ attacking or time buying maneuver, when it's time for those roaches to die to free up supply. We Protoss had to do this a ton in SC1, usually getting a ton of zealots at some point out of absolute necessity, but knowing we would die if we hit 200/200 and sat at 200/200 for more than 30 seconds with a zealot heavy composition. So we dumped them the best way we could. Sometimes in really inefficient ways... but hopefully if they died without killing anything, they were at least buying time. I think deciding what to remax with is one of the biggest difficulties with Zerg. You have to have a standing army, but if roach/hydra isn't it....then what is? A lot of zerg's already do this to some extent to get broodlords, but you need an army to protect them still. Is it broodlord/corruptor/infestor? Broodlord/infestor/hydra? Or is it just something Zerg's have to experiment with more? Remaxing with 10 infestors and 8 broods isn't very realistic since you need like 2500+ gas stockpiled, which means it has to be a more gradual process.
I mean, what we're talking about is making a lategame deathball, pretty much - a 200/200 army of ultras brood lords and infestors is pretty godamn strong, I reckon, but the problem is getting there. Protoss and terrans can build up their deathballs in relative safety because they have strong defensive area control units (tanks/sentries), however Zerg doesn't really have this aspect (so far as we know).
I wonder if defense through aggression (something Day[9] preaches quite a bit) is the way to go? Zerglings do quite a bit of DPS for their mineral and supply cost, especially when upgraded - they get some of the best benefits from attack upgrades in the game, and with adrenal glands gain even more offensive power - since they do so much damage and are a mineral-only unit they're almost ideal for the job. A few overlords of zerglings sprinkled around the protoss's bases could do some damage for free, and even if they don't kill a single unit, you've traded minerals you don't need much for times you need quite a bit.
|
I'm pretty sure Nydus Worms are a support for drop/air attacks rather than a substitute. Nydus Worms create a great reinforcement and retreat path for a drop, and can shelter expensive ground units (especially Infestors and Ultralisks) that you'd rather not risk in an Overlord.
|
Fuck it just stopped at the end where it really gets fascinating, really like how day9 said: If you miss that FF you lose immediatly, if u place it you win (or have a great chance of winning)
Great State of the Game show again 
|
I just got to say, I did the Day 9 Daily yesterday, and beat a Toss. The Toss was pretty bad/predictable and tried to camp on two bases. The only real harass I did was slow down his production with Overseers.
But when you defend with only queens and spine crawlers, holy shit does your economy explode! I had about 3000/2000 banked and not enough larva to spend it fast enough.
I'm really looking forward to giving it another shot tonight against a better player. You end up in a situation similar to Spanishwa's build ... you're not as vulnerable in the early game as you think you are if you have enough queens and base defenses ... although your third, fourth and fifth expansions feel pretty vulnerable until you get real units.
|
Just passing by to say that, sure it's pretty much confirmed that HoTS and the Protoss expansion will add new units to the game. But it's very possible that Blizzard will also choose to remove some existing units.
So in my opinion discussing the state of balance post-HoTS may be a bit premature.
I see that people are talking about the Nydus network, I'll just say that from my experience, when used defensively it can be very hard to find the right places to put them. I find their positioning extremely difficult to perform in order to maximize their effectiveness, especially on some maps. However I admit that I'm not a master of Hotkeys and I don't have 300 apm.
Also Nydus worms can be very painful to use when you need to transfer a lot of units, I believe someone mentionned zerglings earlier in this thread: in my opinion, if one chooses to use a Nydus network, one has to use it in accordance with an overall gameplan. Having an army composed of slow / low-mobility units could make the nydus really shine. Of course, one has to be aware of the maps' specifics features. But as a spectator I would love to see Nydus being used in order to maneuver units such as Ultralisks, Queens, and especially Hydralisks. I feel that Queens and Hydras are way underused atm but that may pertain to another topic.
On the other hand, I can't really comment about offensive Nydus because it depends on the player's decision making, map awareness, multi-tasking, etc.
All in all I'd say that the potential is here.
|
On April 14 2011 06:35 Bellygareth wrote:
The only thing that I don't like, is that:
Terran have trouble against some protoss builds : they devise a build that works very well against it and it works. They do it in two weeks. Two weeks for instance the heavy upgrade has been very very scary to terrans. They had an answer in two weeks. A few builds that would kill the toss making that straight up no question. Same for protoss.
I must've missed something major. What is this build that hard counters mass upgrades?
Replays would be appreciated.
|
On April 14 2011 07:24 Defacer wrote:
I just got to say, I did the Day 9 Daily yesterday, and beat a Toss. The Toss was pretty bad/predictable and tried to camp on two bases. The only real harass I did was slow down his production with Overseers.
But when you defend with only queens and spine crawlers, holy shit does your economy explode! I had about 3000/2000 banked and not enough larva to spend it fast enough.
I'm really looking forward to giving it another shot tonight against a better player. You end up in a situation similar to Spanishwa's build ... you're not as vulnerable in the early game as you think you are if you have enough queens and base defenses ... although your third, fourth and fifth expansions feel pretty vulnerable until you get real units.
make more hatches dood
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
