|
Balance takes time, folks. If you know anything about these types of games, and I'd wager Blizzard knows more than anybody, it's that you have to take it slow and balance in small increments. If you don't, you get this rubber-band oscillation with different FOTM OP races, and pretty soon, nobody has faith in the balance of the game at all. Taking small steps means that, even if you do over-balance, it will be a small swing and not a drastic overnight "OMG now zerg is massively OP" problem.
I know it can seem like the sky is falling with top players threatening to all play Terran. Let's say hypothetically it happens. Eventually, Blizzard will balance the races, and people will start playing zerg again. There will always be people (like me) who just want to play zerg, and if they feel like the race is balanced, they'll switch back eventually. I'm not saying this is ideal, but it is better than a game where balance is all over the place because "HOLY CRAP LET'S ALL PANIC!!`1!" ruled the early release.
I'll be sad if cool switches, but he gotta do what he gotta do, and so does Blizzard.
|
Leaving the game balance like this is basically Blizzard's inner desire to let the BW proscene live!
...I wish
|
On September 24 2010 04:38 PrinceXizor wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 04:33 Karkadinn wrote:On September 24 2010 04:24 PrinceXizor wrote:On September 24 2010 04:20 heishe wrote:On September 24 2010 04:17 PrinceXizor wrote:On September 24 2010 04:11 heishe wrote:
Infestor play is completely useless and relies on the opponents mistakes. No infestor will get inside a Terran base unless the Terran makes mistakes and have fun with good fungal growth on Thors and Tanks. If the Zerg makes a lot of infestors, all the Terran has to do is a solid mech mix and it's gg, since they're insanely gas heavy, even more so if someone is stupid enough to research Neural Parasite.
Mass Infestor play is nothing but gimmicks. It only works if you catch your opponent completely off guard (just like Nydus and Roach Burrow plays etc.), which might happen now since nobody uses it, but once it becomes somewhat more common it will be another useless strat that lived a short live, just like sens 1 base muta etc.
And by the way, unless you park an infestor in every base you have and have perfect control over all of them once the Terran shift-drops in 3 bases they won't stop anything.
btw it's pretty ignorant to assume that all Zerg pro's out there ignore infestors and that TLO is somehow the only one who magically recognizes their godly usefulness. I'm rather sure quite the contrary is the case. Most of them probably played around a lot with the infestor and came to the same conclusion I posted here. I completely and wholeheartily disagree. MASS infestor may suck yes. but infestors are as important as defilers were. If you seriously believe that you must either be on copper league, have no clue about Zerg at all or have no clue about SC1 at all. I wish I could break walls with infestors. Or could it be, that you don't have a clue about Sc2 zerg? or maybe you don't realize the rediculous similarities in Fungal and Dark swarm in terms of function in map control in high level play, or how much zerg relies on positioning and stalling. OR perhaps you just don't realize that Infestors offer everything a defiler offers EXCEPT a plague like spell. Infestors as a gimmick are less than good, infestors as a properly controlled caster are going to become amazingly important as this game continues. An offensive spell that pins units down and does aoe damage has 'ridiculous similarities' to a defensive aoe spell designed to allow melee units to engage fortified positions backed with ranged firepower head-on without suffering massive losses? Okey dokey then. It's the exact opposite spell. but they have the same purpose, they are used to control space, protect key positions, and dominate weaker armies with almost no casualities. "defensive spell designed to allow - units to engage fortitied positions" sounds oxymoronic. I know exactly what you mean though so it's okay.
Why would a defensive spell be needed when assaulting a weaker army? You think that Zerg armies in BW had the advantage when attacking Terran even without using DS? Dark Swarm was intended to even the playing field between melee and range, in recognition of the fact that as armies grow larger, melee becomes weaker and range becomes stronger. It was needed to give the inferior Zerg melee army a chance against a superior Terran army. Because of this, Zerg could still play aggressively. In the sequel, they lost that critical defense and what they've received in return does not fill the same role. At all. It's not a coincidence that Zerg are the reactionary and defensive race now.
|
LOL ,someone watching Viking cup atm? Lalush vs satiini on kulas ravine. both trading bases, satiini losing dropships full of marines. But gets a planetary fortress up on gold, and just masses marine drops all over expos and wins 
Lalush types out: "Look me in the eyes and tell me thats fair".
|
ISSUE #1: Zerglings
Zerglings were high DPS but died instantly in BW. In SC2 they are LOW DPS and die instantly. If Blizzard buffs zerglings DPS, the exciting 'fast and dangerous zerglings vs slow powerful units with splash' dynamic will become more pronounced and balance will be better.
ISSUE #2: Map size
Zerg strength is proportional to map size. Having maps that are too small makes them less able to:
1 - postition overlords, because there is not much area to hide them
2 - exploit the speed of zerglings
3 - exploit the safe use of nydus worms within zerg's map control zone
4 - have wide open spaces for flanking of different unit combinations (ultra splash + ling, etc)
ISSUE #3: Defensive Structures and/or Queen defense
If zerg units won't be buffed, then their defensive structures or queens need a buff to compensate for their inability to safely expand without risking a hatchery death by a mere 4 marauders and a medivac.
|
I hope people will stop coming up with their "own little theories" of how T > Z
Sure the imbalance may be there but I feel like only the highest levels of players can really comment on imbalance.
People like IdrA make great cases. We don't need every bronze gold plat low diamond to share why they got raped by T when the opponent can't even abuse 90% of T's features.
(exaggeratively speaking here)
Thats just my thought on this topic.
It is although intriguing that the "random" players (TLO & Day9) find zerg vs terran absolutely fine.
Day9 did an INTERVIEW with TLO a while back and TLO said its perfectly balanced. Further more Day9 said himself that its too early to call imbalance.
I don't agree wtih tlo or day9. IdrA's arguments seem very sound to me.
|
On September 24 2010 04:38 Oddysay wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 04:26 lolbad wrote:
its also funny to me how we got from "zerg is a reactionary race just get used to it" to this in 1,5 months. pretty self-explanatory well people follow like blink people what the good player say soo usualy we got that after showmatch too , like one good terran will use banshee realy good , the next day everyone will whine about how imbalanced banshee are. before that was reaper , now they got medivac .
gtfo
User was warned for this post
|
protoss are just as hard to deal with as terran are with zerg, theres a thread that collects high level reps and shows the winners, PvZ has a higher P winrate than TvZ does T, just somehow T scrapes ahead in TvP
found the source
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=154731
yet somehow everyone just says terrans OP and calls PvZ balanced
Z sucks at any level, P can mass gates and own, and T win at the highest level
On September 24 2010 04:52 lolbad wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 04:38 Oddysay wrote:On September 24 2010 04:26 lolbad wrote:
its also funny to me how we got from "zerg is a reactionary race just get used to it" to this in 1,5 months. pretty self-explanatory well people follow like blink people what the good player say soo usualy we got that after showmatch too , like one good terran will use banshee realy good , the next day everyone will whine about how imbalanced banshee are. before that was reaper , now they got medivac . gtfo
well said.
|
i like lalush since the beta ~~
|
On September 24 2010 04:49 skipdog172 wrote:
Might zerg needs some more love? It sure is possible. I just can't take one guy's word for it at this early stage in the game.
But it's not one guy's word. It's the overwhelming majority of top players and every single top zerg.
|
When best SC2 Zerg in the world Cool aka Friutseller, FriutTruck is speaking about balance blizzard better listen... and LEarn...
|
On September 24 2010 04:48 moopie wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 04:42 theqat wrote:On September 24 2010 04:40 moopie wrote:On September 24 2010 04:34 SlowBlink wrote:
Also, people telling zergs to do more drop play should note that zerg drops cost 100 min + supply + 150/150 speed + 200/200 drop, Overlords don't have magical healing powers. Medivacs cost 100/100. You can see why this is not a viable option. I agree that zergs need more utility but this is an absurd point. Medivacs are 100/100 EACH. Overlords are 100/0 each. Drop+speed research is a 1 time thing. And yes sometimes you lose overlords (and thus supply) when you doom drop, welcome to BW, zergs still drop play all the time. A one-time thing that costs as much as the three Medivacs that could end the entire game for the Z and Overlords can't heal the units that pop out of them I don't have an issue with drop research being lowered (in fact I think it would be a good thing). What I do have an issue with is people whining that when they lose an overlord, they lose supply and thus they can't drop. That has been a part of zerg play for over 10 years and has proven to work well. Yes it can be risky, but alternatively after drop research you have all your overlords capable of dropping (you never had to build them for the sake of dropping like T built dropships or P shuttles, though you did have to replenish them if you didn't plan your drop well).
More important than the actual cost of the "one time thing" researches, is the time it takes to research them. By the time you've got all of that upgraded, a decent terran will either have vikings out, or have turrets up to fend off muta harass (lair tech+drop+speed isn't just something you can rush to, and still have a usable army). The fact that zerg drops have always cost supply in no way makes the drop more viable, that just means that they've always been less viable.
|
On September 24 2010 04:52 Cyber_Cheese wrote:protoss are just as hard to deal with as terran are with zerg, theres a thread that collects high level reps and shows the winners, PvZ has a higher P winrate than TvZ does T, just somehow T scrapes ahead in TvP found the source http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=154731yet somehow everyone just says terrans OP and calls PvZ balanced Z sucks at any level, P can mass gates and own, and T win at the highest level Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 04:52 lolbad wrote:On September 24 2010 04:38 Oddysay wrote:On September 24 2010 04:26 lolbad wrote:
its also funny to me how we got from "zerg is a reactionary race just get used to it" to this in 1,5 months. pretty self-explanatory well people follow like blink people what the good player say soo usualy we got that after showmatch too , like one good terran will use banshee realy good , the next day everyone will whine about how imbalanced banshee are. before that was reaper , now they got medivac . gtfo well said.
dude, even the original poster says not to use that as statistical evidence of anything
god... seriously..
|
On September 24 2010 04:52 0neder wrote:
ISSUE #1: Zerglings
Zerglings were high DPS but died instantly in BW. In SC2 they are LOW DPS and die instantly. If Blizzard buffs zerglings DPS, the exciting 'fast and dangerous zerglings vs slow powerful units with splash' dynamic will become more pronounced and balance will be better.
Lings just suck soooo bad in SC2!
|
On September 24 2010 04:49 skipdog172 wrote:
I'm surprised that nobody here could possibly suggest that Zergs just haven't come up with the right strategies yet. It seems like some of you forget some of the BW imbalances that existed for a long time and were only fixed by players coming up with new build orders months in the future. Blizzard didn't patch anything...it took pro teams months for somebody to finally come up with something that worked.
I know you all want to think that all of these top SC2 pros are pure strategic geniuses who CLEARLY would find the strat/response that worked if it existed, but really these guys are mechanics pros. They aren't creative super geniuses who come up with all the builds themselves.
Even now there are constantly new builds from all races developing all the time. From one tournament to the next, the so-called "standard" openings are constantly changing for all races. To those claiming Blizzard doesn't care and bla bla, you must not have been around for all of the SC1/BW imbalances. They clearly want their game to be as balanced as possible.
Might zerg needs some more love? It sure is possible. I just can't take one guy's word for it at this early stage in the game.
if anything, terran hasnt come up with all the strategies nor reached their potential. zerg has fewer fighting units and no offensive options in early game (all defensive until 3rd base and beyond)
there isnt as much depth to the zerg arsenal as there was in BW and in addition to that, the average rts gamer today has a far higher rts IQ and is light years ahead of the average 1999 BW player (so its a very unfair comparison)
but i will agree that everything hasnt been fully explored (obviously). i believe artosis wrote a thread about why zerg seemed overpowered in beta (because the learning curve was shorter due to the fact that zerg has fewer openings so zerg fully explored the optimal openings combined with the fact zerg has fewer units so zerg reached their strategic potential much much earlier than terran did)
|
On September 24 2010 04:40 kNyTTyM wrote:
So uh how many infestors are you getting? I acknowledge infestors are good units but getting enough to prevent terran move out seems almost unrealistic. 6 infestors equates to gas for 9 mutalisks or 36 banes. Tanks with proper sight management (using an scv or medivac to max range) will also eat the armored infestors. Lastly what unit are you getting in combination with infestors? so we went pretty off topic so last one from me
I get 1-2 earlyish and then the numbers grow as the amount i have to defend and the size of my army increase. I'd say in a ideal game (where i get half the map and have a maxed army) i'd get 10-12 infestors.
I get them in addition to my army regardless of composition unless getting mutalisks since i haven't exactly worked out the best way to muta micro with fungal.
Vs Terran i get alot of lings early, and they evolve into ultralisks or hydras or brood lords.
Vs Protoss i get roaches and they evolve into ultralisks hydras or brood lords (considering mutalisks too, still working on it)
VS Zerg i get ling/bling into hydralisk and ultras to end it
all with infestors.
a full energy infestor and 3 hydralisks can protect a base entirely from drops except doom drops, you need 2 infestors and 5 hydras for those assuming you spot the enemy coming. which i advocate greatly. there is a direct correlation to amount of map visible to wins as zerg.
I mean i'm experimenting with more unit compositions but that is what i'm comfortable with. and you don't assault fortified tanked areas. you just kill them if they try to move. fungal = forced siege mode. and forcing them to be sieging unsieging a ton opens alot of windows for attack. fungal has a range of 9 and with the AOE tanks literally have to be crawling a tank length at a time in order to avoid being fungal'd. and that push is so slow you can easily get ultralisks/counters up to destroy him.
infestors have horrible AI. they RUN into battle without being told so, but then they get hit, realize they don't have an attack and then run away. so they will suicide if you are not paying attention.
|
they should split the GSL2 into 2 tourneys, one for terrams and one for everyone else =[
|
On September 24 2010 04:49 skipdog172 wrote:
I'm surprised that nobody here could possibly suggest that Zergs just haven't come up with the right strategies yet.
People have been saying that for months, but most of those who have said this, have been ignorant people who really don't know how the 1v1 game works.
This isn't about "strategies" or the strength of individual units, but about a lack of initiative and scouting.
|
I swear, I have a knack for knowing the imbalance of zerg or what pros would complain about at least. I've said it many times: Make Marine/Marauders deal less damage per second against buildings and make the medivacs able to carry less food (four's a good number).
It doesn't help that a Zerg player would need to take a crapshot against a walled in terran. Dealing with banshee rush and mass MMs require completely different approaches as Zerg. I'm not gonna bother repeating my logical reasonings because it'll just be met by "Sacrifical overlord, noob".
EDIT: Forgot to say 'against buildings'.
|
On September 24 2010 04:55 PrinceXizor wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 04:40 kNyTTyM wrote:
So uh how many infestors are you getting? I acknowledge infestors are good units but getting enough to prevent terran move out seems almost unrealistic. 6 infestors equates to gas for 9 mutalisks or 36 banes. Tanks with proper sight management (using an scv or medivac to max range) will also eat the armored infestors. Lastly what unit are you getting in combination with infestors? so we went pretty off topic so last one from me
I get 1-2 earlyish and then the numbers grow as the amount i have to defend and the size of my army increase. I'd say in a ideal game (where i get half the map and have a maxed army) i'd get 10-12 infestors. I get them in addition to my army regardless of composition unless getting mutalisks since i haven't exactly worked out the best way to muta micro with fungal. Vs Terran i get alot of lings early, and they evolve into ultralisks or hydras or brood lords. Vs Protoss i get roaches and they evolve into ultralisks hydras or brood lords (considering mutalisks too, still working on it) VS Zerg i get ling/bling into hydralisk and ultras to end it all with infestors. a full energy infestor and 3 hydralisks can protect a base entirely from drops except doom drops, you need 2 infestors and 5 hydras for those assuming you spot the enemy coming. which i advocate greatly. there is a direct correlation to amount of map visible to wins as zerg. I mean i'm experimenting with more unit compositions but that is what i'm comfortable with. and you don't assault fortified tanked areas. you just kill them if they try to move. fungal = forced siege mode. and forcing them to be sieging unsieging a ton opens alot of windows for attack. fungal has a range of 9 and with the AOE tanks literally have to be crawling a tank length at a time in order to avoid being fungal'd. and that push is so slow you can easily get ultralisks/counters up to destroy him. infestors have horrible AI. they RUN into battle without being told so, but then they get hit, realize they don't have an attack and then run away. so they will suicide if you are not paying attention.
Off topic, but do you have any recommended replays of you doing this ZvT? I'm interested in comparing my timings to your timings to see what areas you're doing things better than me. Cause from the description you play a very similar ZvT to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
