Official State of the Game Podcast Thread - Page 893

On May 04 2011 13:48 rO_Or wrote:


He doesn't want a build that beats everything.... Stop twisting his words people... He said that if Zerg can't scout an opponents strategy then they need a build that can reasonably prepare for anything.

On May 04 2011 13:49 BronzeKnee wrote:


Makes me upset though when people state that Idra wants a build that beats everything, and he doesn't. He wants to be able to scout, or to be able to do some build that is safe against anything.

And I think Protoss has a build that does this, if you go 3 gate Robo vs Terran, you should hold any early aggression, Banshee, Thor, Hellion, MM, whatever. Zerg doesn't have this.

On May 04 2011 13:46 Ribbon wrote:


There's a build that lets Idra hatch-first, drone really hard, and be safe against all early aggression.

If that build beat an FE as well, it would be FUCKING LUDICROUS. Imagine if Zerg had a built that was safe against everything one-base, economical, and you couldn't expand against.

That's what Idra's asking for. He doesn't want to be "safe", he wants to be able to win every game against a foreigner because "I shouldn't be losing to these people".

On May 04 2011 13:48 Seagull_ wrote:
In every competitive game that develops there will be periods of domination and some races will look absolutely awful. It's disappointing to see top players claim imbalance so early into a game's life and ignore all the BW history :/

On May 04 2011 13:50 Baltor wrote:


Day[9] isn't stating that all games (read: SC2) are completely balanced. If you were listening to his points earlier, he acknowledged that there might well be some imbalance, and I'm sure those of us that listened to IdrA's examples and have our own experiences can agree.

But Day[9] IS stating that it's rather useless to discuss about them, especially when in an emotional state. IdrA's always been somewhat of an emotional player, and since he has the results and skill to back that up, I say more power to him. But when he lets his emotions seep into discussions like this, it really establishes nothing. We get to see his opinion (which most of us already knew) and nothing more. Day[9] is more of a proponent of having people try to figure out solutions to the perceived imbalance problems while the Blizzard guys analyze and decide what does and doesn't need to be fixed. This seems to be the much more logical route when you realize that a podcast like SotG isn't a successful vehicle for this sort of discussion at all; if these discussions are to take place, they're to take place somewhere more official if we want them to make any difference. THAT's what Day[9] is stating.

On May 04 2011 13:47 TheTenthDoc wrote:


Here's the thing: Zerg can scout those greedy builds with overlords (versus Terran, since the marine count is fairly low) and lings (versus Protoss) and respond appropriately, taking an early gas or another expansion. You're not forced to not take gas until 50 food if you see a 14 CC or 14 nexus...

On May 04 2011 13:46 theqat wrote:


Not what happens at all. If you had watched his stream when he commentated a few months ago, you'd know that.

On May 04 2011 13:50 Elefanto wrote:


He's absolutely right, idra want zergs to have a build that is safe against everything AND be abe to be on equal footing economically.

I can make the absolut same statement about PvT from a protoss point.

If i don't go 1 gate expand against a Terran that goes 1 rax cc, i'm behind.
I have the option to go 1 gate 1 robo and send an observer to scout and be safe.
But i traded safety against economy.
If i go 1 gate expand against terran, i cant scout properly what he's doing.
He could go 2 rax and i die / have to sacrifice the expansion and be behind.
I could die to a cloaked banshee if i don't go a robo fast enough.
But if i go a fast robo to deal with a possible cloaked banshee, i die to a blue flame drop.
And i have absolut NO chance to see what he is doing.

In exchange i cant really punish him for going 1 rax cc, he can has the oc in his base and double mule and get a 1.2k income off of 1 base.
The only thing i can do is use a build heavy all-in build like proxy stargate or a 4 gate.
Yet they don't pay off 100%.

Zerg has the same options to be safe, like the spanishiwa style or others that
set the economy back.
You can't have anything idra.

Idra has a problem with the design of the game, that risky styles pay off so fucking hard, and that there are so many situations where you have to guess, and if you guess wrong you die / are hard behind and through macro mechanics it's even more drastic.

That's nothing imbalance between the races.
Maybe Zerg has sometimes a tougher time facing those situation, but there are also
situations were zerg benefit from those. Where zergs are 15+ drones ahead in the early and are
so fucking far ahead that it's nearly impossible to catch up if you don't camp to 200/200.

On May 04 2011 13:52 Asparagus wrote:


Then camp to 200/200 deathball and roll zerg's 6 bases by marching into his base with his hive tech.

On May 04 2011 13:48 Seagull_ wrote:
In every competitive game that develops there will be periods of domination and some races will look absolutely awful. It's disappointing to see top players claim imbalance so early into a game's life and ignore all the BW history :/

On May 04 2011 13:51 BronzeKnee wrote:


It doesn't matter who says or does it, or where it happens, right is right and wrong is wrong.

Doesn't matter if Idra is emotional, or if it is discussed in SotG. His arguements were valid and solid. Disagree? Then refute him with logic.

On May 04 2011 13:52 Techno wrote:



Personally I think the zerg would, because of the unit production mechanism.

On May 04 2011 13:53 Elefanto wrote:


Then you played fucking terrible and deserve to lose hardcore.