Official State of the Game Podcast Thread - Page 894

On May 04 2011 13:41 BronzeKnee wrote:
He states that the early game is too risky for Zerg, because they are the defensive race, and they cannot scout and do not have a standard safe build that is safe against everything.

Thus, they can lose to something randomly, regardless of skill. That is a bad game mechanic.

Tyler had a good rebuttal, whereas Day[9] did not, he stated that Protoss takes risks and does a build that might lose to X but are safe against Y, Z and W, and the Protoss just hopes Zerg doesn't do X, and it often pays off, since Zerg only does X a small amount of the time (often doing Y, Z or W).

Idra agreed, and said that was a bad game mechanic too, because it introduces random chance, like rock-paper-scissors. Tyler agreed.

So in the end, Tyler and Idra agree that the game is mechanically bad, because of the randomness.

That sums up the arguement. I love logical arguements.

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 13:43 Cartel wrote:
Day9 had nothing to bring to the conversation, and in my opinion is totally wrong about his ideas that ALL GAMES ARE BALANCED no matter what, simply because we havent discovered it yet in meta game.


So let me give Day9 and example. What if Zerglings did 50 dmg. Would each race find a way to make the overall game balanced? Would it just take time? Of course its not balanced, and should be fixed. But Day9 would think its balanced we just haven't figured it out yet.

On May 04 2011 13:41 TheTenthDoc wrote:


And he admitted the Spanishiwa build does that second thing...didn't he?

On May 04 2011 13:43 Ganjamaster wrote:
I cant wait to hear a whole week of IdrA commentary

On May 04 2011 13:40 dtz wrote:
or you can always play like julyzerg and pay no heed to what opponent does. but i think philosophically, idra does not like that.