Official State of the Game Podcast Thread - Page 973

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 04:16 vojnik wrote:


but one point that idra makes that separates the terran and protoss aspect is that zerg is the defensive race. Also there are builds like 2 gate robo vs terran and 3 gate expand vs zerg that are pretty safe compared to standard zerg openings.

On May 05 2011 05:57 corpuscle wrote:


A one-base Zerg can't hold off any sort of early aggression (4gate, 3rax, etc.) because you simply won't have enough units.

It's pretty much the most accepted fact of Zerg play that you need to be one base ahead of your opponent at all times, the race simply isn't designed to be able to deal with T or P on equal bases.

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 06:02 Soap wrote:
I think no one brought this up in the cast out of respect for Tyler, but IdrA says he and ret are the only zergs winning tournaments because they are supposed to, out of their experience from BW. Tyler was his major rival, now plays the ez race, and he isn't winning shit. Case closed.

Zerg don't have many good players. This game is less than an year old and someone managed to switch from terran and become top 5 zerg in the world sans Korea, there are new players in the rise, I have to concur that this balance discussion is just silly and leads to nothing but Blizzard going back and forth with the game under "pro players" blessings.

See how BW pro players solve "imbalances": http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=217470. Just less humorously, perhaps. kekekeke

On May 05 2011 06:15 sureshot_ wrote:


Wait, how exactly is that case closed? lol.
You found one example of a good player who plays an easy race and loses. Great? Now find an example of a noob zerg who wins tournaments and has very little experience. The point you made is hardly relevant.

Also I really dislike the comments being made that a balance discussion is "silly," considering, after all, the discussion is for improving the game. We don't dictate what decisions Blizzard makes, we simply give opinions and propose ideas. Statistically speaking Zerg IS the weakest race as of right now. The only real argument I see against that point is that Zerg is the least played race out of the three. If that's the source of the problem then that's the issue which needs to be addressed by Blizzard.

On May 05 2011 06:02 Soap wrote:
I think no one brought this up in the cast out of respect for Tyler, but IdrA says he and ret are the only zergs winning tournaments because they are supposed to, out of their experience from BW. Tyler was his major rival, now plays the ez race, and he isn't winning shit. Case closed.

Zerg don't have many good players. This game is less than an year old and someone managed to switch from terran and become top 5 zerg in the world sans Korea, there are new players in the rise, I have to concur that this balance discussion is just silly and leads to nothing but Blizzard going back and forth with the game under "pro players" blessings.

See how BW pro players solve "imbalances": http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=217470. Just less humorously, perhaps. kekekeke

On May 05 2011 06:02 Soap wrote:
I think no one brought this up in the cast out of respect for Tyler, but IdrA says he and ret are the only zergs winning tournaments because they are supposed to, out of their experience from BW. Tyler was his major rival, now plays the ez race, and he isn't winning shit. Case closed.

Zerg don't have many good players. This game is less than an year old and someone managed to switch from terran and become top 5 zerg in the world sans Korea, there are new players in the rise, I have to concur that this balance discussion is just silly and leads to nothing but Blizzard going back and forth with the game under "pro players" blessings.

See how BW pro players solve "imbalances": http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=217470. Just less humorously, perhaps. kekekeke

On May 05 2011 06:16 Mordiford wrote:


What statistics? Is it statistically significant?

The charts I looked at put every race within a couple of percent of each other in the foreign scene, it was a fair sample size.

Please present your statistics to show me why Zerg is statistically the weakest race. I'm kind of curious, just want to know.

On May 05 2011 06:16 Mordiford wrote:


What statistics? Is it statistically significant?

The charts I looked at put every race within a couple of percent of each other in the foreign scene, it was a fair sample size.

Please present your statistics to show me why Zerg is statistically the weakest race. I'm kind of curious, just want to know.