Official State of the Game Podcast Thread - Page 971

On May 05 2011 05:04 trNimitz wrote:
Day9 is not a pro player, he's a commentator, unlike for Idra there's no reason for him to try and come up with ideas for Zerg. Nevermind Idra never even made a clear argument, he was just stating his thoughts on the game without anything actually supporting it. You can't just say "OMG I can't scout his base because of marines so I lose!"

The sad thing is Idra is so into this 'zerg is UP' thing I don't think he'll ever be able to get out of it, it's rather hard to accept you're wrong after you thought you were right for so long.

Oh and btw, from what I've heard (never played BW), idra was B-level in iCCup while day9 was A. Says it all.

On May 05 2011 05:01 MajorityofOne wrote:


This. Balance isn't about races not having weaknesses, it's about races having varieties of strengths and weaknesses which ultimately leave them at around even with any other race.

Consider the big weaknesses of Zerg. Lack of effective early scouting, lack of early aggression options beyond the coinflip all-ins or the two-base Kyrix, and cost-ineffective units in late-game scenarios (moreso versus P than T). None of those is actually a crippling, game-breaking weakness, and they are compensated by other strengths: excellent scouting abilities once you get ovie speed or seers, a period between spire tech/zerg's third and the endgame where Zerg has total map control and every option for harassment and aggression becomes very risky for P/T, and superior macro mechanics that scale as you add more bases, which allows Zerg, in theory, to overwhelm its opponents with waves of less efficient units.

More specifically, the scouting problem is counteracted by the fact that scouting a one-base Terran or Protoss automatically means a few things. One, they need to be aggressive in some capacity, so you can expect either a push or some kind of tech. Two, while they be hiding a first expo in-base in the case of Terran, they are very unlikely to be rushing for a third, the most effective counter to a properly turtled Zerg. That means as Zerg you only need to consider a handful of options, and while no build beats all of them, you can account for MOST of them with a Spanishiwa style defense. The style of play that demolishes that defense is exploiting Zerg's passivity with a fast third, but if you've scouted them staying on one base then you know thats rather unlikely. Accounting for cloaked units can be hard, but all you need to check for any "tech" aggression is the double-gas, and if you can't scout that then your overlords are mentally deficient. My main point is that one-base situations are risky for both the T/P and the Zerg, not the Zerg only. They're often coinflips, and coinflips work both ways. Any two-base all-in play should hit after you've got lair tech, and so you shouldn't have problems scouting it. The cancel-nexus build is, I'll admit, highly abusive of Zergs early scouting deficiencies, but hopefully the warp gate nerf forthcoming will help Zerg overcome that.

On the point of cost-efficiency, I'll also cede that the Protoss deathball is perhaps too cost-efficient, as the discrepancy between Zerg and Protoss units in the lategame is overwhelming to the point that nothing short of perfect composition and control really helps. But all that means is that the onus is on Zerg to capitalize on its period of mid to early late game map dominance. No, that aggression won't always work, as Idra/Kiwikaki demonstrates. But nothing in Starcraft is guaranteed. Tyler mentioned a few SOTGs ago that people tend to think of defending as easy, but thats far from true; that a P or T manages to thwart your attempts at aggression is no more imbalanced than a Zerg shutting down an attempted banshee harass. When a Zerg fails to capitalize on its midgame advantage, thats more imperfect play than imbalance.

I know that was very theorycrafty. But I hate when people make ridiculous generalizations, like when Idra says "Zerg can't scout" or "Zerg can't beat Protoss lategame" without taking into account the broader context or considering the relative strengths and weaknesses of all races through all of 'standard play". It's intellectually lazy and dishonest, more a product of frustration than of understanding. I'm not claiming Idra doesn't have a very high understanding of the game, because his understanding is as good as anyone currently alive. But knowledge combined with bias, and especially with frustration, is a dangerous thing; he's in a uniquely qualified position to comment on balance due to his incredible experience, and uses that position for ill rather than good by mentioning and discussing only the evidence that fits his views.

On May 05 2011 05:08 B-Wong wrote:


IdrA was a B-Teamer in Korea. On a professional team. Woops?

On May 05 2011 05:04 Saechiis wrote:
The whole IdrA and Day[9] debate was meaningless, makes me sad that people think IdrA talking loud and creating an uncomfortable interrogative form of discussion means that he's making a point. All Sean tried to convey was that he found any sort of balance discussion useless and that if he were to go down that path it would be in the form of a calm drawn-out discussion, which he hinted at was impossible since IdrA cannot separate his emotions from balance talk.

IdrA simply can't be down to earth and talk about the game for what it is, his remarks are always infused with anger and frustration making it impossible to argue with him on a non-personal level. The game he's playing professionally is ridiculous, all Protoss players are ridiculous, all Terran players are ridiculous, he tells people on a daily basis that they're ridiculous, when he wins it's because of his skills overcoming an impossibly large disadvantage and his opponent sucking, when he loses it was because his opponent played an overpowered race and was doing an abusive risky all-in that paid off because Zerg can't scout. It's an irrational construction in which IdrA conveniently can do no wrong and points his finger from atop his pedestal of victimized judgment.

Tyler, InControl and Day[9] all realize it's pointless to discuss SC2's balance with a friend that is so invested in withdrawing any responsibility for his ingame performance, especially when any attempt to contest those views is perceived as hostile and met with a condescending tone. What do you say to someone that believes he is so superior that he shouldn't be able to lose a game and revolves all his logic around proving that point? What do you say to someone who talks in absolutes, like "I can't scout", "I can't win", "I've tried everything? I know there's plenty of people who see IdrA's extremism as straightforward and a form of pure truth, but is it really? Are things said in frustration really the truth? Or are they moments in which you give in to your feelings of unfairness and accept them as truth? Do people really feel that being emotional and vocal is a good foundation to take a clean look at a game's balance? Was that time you told your parents you hated their guts really a moment of unblemished truth? Or was it a moment in which you got caught up in the emotion and didn't want to believe there was any other truth?


Basically, I'm tired of everyone taking IdrA's irrational ranting so seriously, he just won the IPL one-sidedly stomping everyone and even leaving undecided games for no apparent reason. Ofcourse he's quick to defend himself by saying SeleCt and KiWiKaKi suck, but what does this prove besides the fact that he will by any means necessary justify his beliefs of Zerg being underpowered ?

On May 05 2011 05:14 TheTenthDoc wrote:


Still, Day9 was one of the very few A-level NA players from what I've heard (followed BW but not iCCup) and played Zerg; that's why you constantly hear him say "well how is this any different from SC1 Zerg" when talking with IdrA. Given his tournament results I think he might have done even better if he had gone to Korea, like IdrA and Tyler did. But he decided to go to college instead.

On May 05 2011 04:36 ComusLoM wrote:
I agree with Tyler's point that Colbi handled the EG Masters cup absolutely terribly and the EG guys really should be ashamed of being associated with his actions. Geoff and Idra just didn't get Tyler's point that Colbi's method of discussion was terrible.

Colbi was horribly deceptive and he should have been laughed off the community with such blatant lies.

On May 05 2011 04:29 zarepath wrote:


It means that in order for Zerg to have the same production as a Terran or Protoss, they must have a second hatch.

It's a function of their units being weaker per cost, but making up for that by being more easily mass-produced. In order for the Zerg to have that mass-production advantage (that is the only thing keeping Zerg units from just being straight-up awful), they have to expand and keep that expansion in the early game -- thus making them defensive.

On May 05 2011 05:20 Severedevil wrote:

But they don't. One hatch + one Queen can pump an entire saturated base's income into Roaches or into Zergling/Baneling, which are a very cost-effective fighting units in the early game.

Not to say a second hatch isn't generally the better choice... but you can absolutely pour all your cash into production without one.


Zerg units aren't inherently weaker per cost than Terran or Protoss. It depends completely on what army is being pitted against what, and how.

Their cheap units (Roach/Ling) are very efficient in engagements of small numbers. The more expensive units (Infestors, Banelings, Broodlords, Ultralisks) generally shine in bigger fights.

On May 05 2011 05:14 TheTenthDoc wrote:


Still, Day9 was one of the very few A-level NA players from what I've heard (followed BW but not iCCup) and played Zerg; that's why you constantly hear him say "well how is this any different from SC1 Zerg" when talking with IdrA. Given his tournament results I think he might have done even better if he had gone to Korea, like IdrA and Tyler did. But he decided to go to college instead.

On May 05 2011 05:04 trNimitz wrote:


Oh and btw, from what I've heard (never played BW), idra was B-level in iCCup while day9 was A. Says it all.

On May 05 2011 05:18 Yaotzin wrote:
What level was IdrA's SC1 Zerg?

On May 05 2011 05:35 Yaotzin wrote:
I know, that's why I asked what level his Zerg was. Since people were comparing him to Day9. Wondering who had the better Zerg.

On May 05 2011 04:09 MrCon wrote:
But I'm not even taking side on the EGMasterCup debate, I don't think either is right or wrong. I have to say you missed the point too, as my post wasn't at all about this particular thread. The thing is, teamliquid is the best place for starcraft 2 because it wipes out pollution quickly. Be it trolls, spammers, advertisers...By PR bullshit I don't talk about someone who is publicly and transparently supporting an organisation (that's why the geof comment about stride gum was completely misplaced), I talk about people that have an agenda but who act like they don't.

So people stop about this, if I had to side on the EGMaster thing, I would side this EG this time (but philosophically I side with TL). I think Tyler handled this poorly.