EPTThe Actual Issues Affecting Gameplay - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
PeRk
United States73 Posts
| ||
|
babyToSS
233 Posts
(1) Early zerg scouting n TvZ - Its very hard for zerg to prepare for reapers and banshees without messing up econ. However, unless you are facing a crazy good T, 99% of people on the ladder don't have the mechanics to effectively pull off the reaper build. Aside from this and siege tanks on some maps, TvZ seems fine and Muta/ling/bling is a bitch to deal with. (2) Stim Maruder drops - Ok I have to give this to the OP. Stim marauders sniping buildings is insane. Those who have been on the receiving end of this know exactly what I am talking about. Also the tech lab switching allows terran to open up one bit of evertything in his tech in tree in the first few minutes of his game but after that T has the hardest time switching his army composition. With P and Z it is way easier to switch around your army composition to something more effective. In fact Toss is the easiest. They volume of tech support required is little and you on 2-3 bases you can get some of everything. A ball of gateway+colo+storm+some voids is very hard to deal with. | ||
|
Paperscraps
United States639 Posts
On September 02 2010 02:54 JinDesu wrote: Good. Then make the tech lab match my cybernetics core costs. You do realize that terran has to upgrade to tech lab for every barracks right? It adds up. | ||
|
Deadlyfish
Denmark1980 Posts
Out of a starport a tech lab opens up 2 units, one of which is only a detector. I think people are trying to directly compare races, which doesnt work since the races are all so different. When a protoss does 2 gate cyber/robo i dont complain that the protoss can now make 6 units. It's just part of scouting. I'd really hate it if each unit required a specific building. I'd be stuck with that build for some time, and my opponent would know exactly what i was doing, which doesnt really sound that fun. Yes i know that zerg has 1 building per unit but please dont compare 2 different races, because you cant. I agree with the maps being unbalanced though, Kulas especially. | ||
|
Malabyte
Norway75 Posts
On September 02 2010 02:57 GGzerG wrote: Honestly I think it's mainly the maps, play on the iCCup maps and you will see... =P My thoughts exactly. | ||
|
iCanada
Canada10660 Posts
As of now, the Hydra moves at 2.25 off creep (same speed as the Siege Tank.) and 3.375 on creep. Just keep the on creep speed 3.375, and make their normal speed 2.596 that way they can actually pull of things like flanks, and be effective at doing things such as retreating, pushing, or even just simple micro-dancing. This change still allows units that are meant to be faster than the Hydra (such as stalkers, Reapers, or stimmed MM for example) to outspeed it by a wide margin, it just becomes much less creep bound. | ||
|
albis
United States652 Posts
| ||
|
Snowfield
1289 Posts
On September 02 2010 02:32 JHancho wrote: But Stalkers and Zealots don't INSTANTLY vaporize armored/light units. Reapers counter Zerg early game pretty hard, and when controlled, can deal damage to Roaches. Marauders, well, they annihilate what the Reapers can't easily kill. When all else fails, Marines are there to pick up the slack. But his point is that for 50/25 you get two insanely good (situational, maybe) units, whereas Toss have to spend 150 and wait much longer for Stalkers, or Zerg 150 and wait for Roaches. But for 150 you get the tech for all your wargates, you don't need additional production, you just need the gateways to produce. to pump 3 rax marauder vs 3 gate stalkers you need 150/75 of techlabs, i don't really see the problem. | ||
|
Disell
United States3 Posts
On September 02 2010 03:07 Paperscraps wrote: You do realize that terran has to upgrade to tech lab for every barracks right? It adds up. This is what most are not realizing. For example, a 5 Rax Reaper build requires 5 Tech labs - that's 250 minerals and 125 gas altogether. | ||
|
walnutmon
10 Posts
On September 02 2010 02:56 Nightfall.589 wrote: Given the number of changes people want to make to the game, you'd figure that Zerg only win 30% of their games, rather then the 49.5% they do on ladder. Hydras moving at stalker speeds off-creep would be insanely overpowered. And I can't imagine you referring to anything else when you want to buff off-creep unit movement speeds. Creep giving movement speed is a good mechanic. It gives the race a much-needed defensive advantage. If anything, the game needs more defensive advantages, which would encourage macro-oriented gameplay, instead of one-base all-ins. Your underlying assumption here is entirely false, though it's logical and easy to make this mistake, and unless you're well versed in statistical analysis there is no fault in making it. The more games that are played the more closely every race match-up will get to %50 split, this is because of the matchmaking system. Let's go ahead and assume (no agreement needed, it's just an assumption) that Zerg is underpowered, and Terran is overpowered and Protoss is exactly in the middle. As more and more games are played the average Gold Zerg player will be somewhat better than the average gold Protoss player, and considerably better than the average gold terran player. Now the matchmaking system will continue to pit these three differently distributed players against each other, and while the Zerg is underpowered, they will split games with the Terran, and with the Protoss, and with other Zerg players because that is how the MATCHMAKING system works. So in order to know if a race is over-powered you would need more data than just the distribution of wins between races, you'd need some model of skill in each match-up, so you could see what the average win distribution is between each race AND the average skill of each player is. If you took APM (a poor model, but something to work with), and then said APM is the sole indicator of skill, you could then take the average APM of the terran and zerg, if they were equal, and the 50% split still occurred, then you would be able to conclude that terran and zerg are equally matched. *keep in mind, I made some big assumptions to make my point, and I do not think using APM as the value of skill is a good idea, nor an accurate one | ||
|
Quepp42
United States96 Posts
But on topic, I think this is an excellent post, I'm a zerg main and I really wish that the creep mechanic would change in some regard, either let it spread faster or tweak what kind/amount of bonus it gives you. Also, scouting terran is such a pain due to ambiguity of tech labs, wall offs, and marines' fetish for shooting ovies  | ||
|
Bair
United States698 Posts
On September 02 2010 02:45 Zoroth wrote: Uhm, I think the OP needs to revisit a number of these things and try actually seeing things in action, because the way you present these things makes it look like you haven't done any of that at all. Your theories are full of holes and you're trying to find issues that don't exist. Have you discussed these things with pro players and tried to figure out why Blizzard have these things implemented? Cause most of this has already been addressed. Just a little hint - things aren't necessarily always as they immediately seem. There might be a little deeper thought behind Blizzard's decisions than what you seem to assume. The Art of War is a great book to read, I recommend it to anyone regardless. It's even a suitable book for skimming, so you don't need to read it word-by-word. Just a hint, when attacking another's post, it helps to specifically point out the parts you are attacking, else you just sound like you are saying "lol op, ur post is bad." I think that many of the current issues will be adressed in future patches/expansions. For one, you have the psionic unit type which is present of multiple units, but no actual affect on gameplay. I have a feeling blizzard has some ideas up their sleeve they have been holding on to, and this is the precursor of such. | ||
|
Grimjim
United States395 Posts
On September 02 2010 02:56 Nightfall.589 wrote: Given the number of changes people want to make to the game, you'd figure that Zerg only win 30% of their games, rather then the 49.5% they do on ladder.. I'm not going get involved in this IMBA discussion, but I couldn't ignore how wrong this statement is. The Matchmaking System will automatically pair you with opponents until it reaches a 50% win ratio, no matter your race or league. If you win a game, the next game will be against someone better. If you lose a game, it will be against someone slightly worse. So the reason every race appears to have a 50% win percentage is because they do, but not because of racial balance, but because the system makes it that way. To believe you can derive racial balance from a system that forces everyone into a 50% win ratio is simply wrong. You want a place to go for balance information? Look at the Top 200 race statistics. The fact there are only 30 Zerg in the Top 200 should ring some bells. | ||
|
Snowfield
1289 Posts
On September 02 2010 03:18 Disell wrote: This is what most are not realizing. For example, a 5 Rax Reaper build requires 5 Tech labs - that's 150 minerals and 125 gas altogether. No thats 250/125 | ||
|
NastyMarine
United States1252 Posts
| ||
|
Disell
United States3 Posts
Ah right, fail math on my part >_< | ||
|
mahnini
United States6862 Posts
| ||
|
silencesc
United States464 Posts
One thing though, while I agree that the auto cast system is really lame and easy, it is good for some of the new spells. For FF, if you had to click every sentry and then F and then the place and repeat, it would make the spell useless, as it's for quickly splitting armies or making them unable to retreat. Just a thought. On September 02 2010 02:11 mOnion wrote: nothing new here that hasn't already been discussed also what's your rank? ^ this is what's wrong with TL imo: it doesn't matter what his rank is, he's making observations. | ||
|
Medzo
United States627 Posts
On September 02 2010 02:19 Arrian wrote: I don't understand your argument here at all. It's one thing to say Zerg ought to be faster and another to make some sort of twisted assertion that a speed boost on creep is a flaw(?). It also doesn't make sense to say it's a problem if it permits Zerg to do something else. Honestly, if Zerg was forced to be aggressive all the time, I'd much more easily conclude that that is the flaw than anything else. There may be better ways to play a race, but every option ought to be available. It doesn't help, or make anything more interesting, to limit options. Expanding options is almost always the better choice. As said before, creep doesn't make Zerg immobile, which you seem to be trying to say somehow. It just makes them more mobile elsewhere. Right now, there is hardly any combo more mobile than muta/ling. Hydra roach is a little clumsy, but with speed upgrade on the roaches it's better. Ultras are wayyy faster than they were in BW, and they can actually keep up okay with the rest of your army. Hydras are the lone unit that's exceedingly slow by comparison, and that is something that can be compensated for. By that I mean, I basically don't agree with anything you're saying about Zerg's mobility. In BW, you really couldn't do speedy things with anything other than mutas and lings anyway, so your point about harrassment is a little silly. How many units should Zerg be able to harass with? In what way? Those are important questions. Honestly, too, speed roaches and speed banelings can move really fast compared to some opposing compositions. Im pretty sure what hes saying is that the game is balanced to where zerg can fight on creep with extra speed. Meaning fighting on creep is fighting at an advantage and fighting off creep is a disadvantage. Meaning every time you go to harass or assault a base you're fighting at a disadvantage against an equal skilled opponent. | ||
|
NastyMarine
United States1252 Posts
| ||
| ||
