|
On September 24 2010 10:12 kNyTTyM wrote:
Number of times I have played against multiple drops in a zvt? 0. Number of times I have played against multiple drops against terran ever? Once against stalife when I played him PvT. Why? Because most terrans are so fucking bad they can't handle a clicking d twice for two drop locations. Probably 60% of tvzs don't make it out of early game due to the terrans options (this is just a guess). It has been quite some time since I lost a late game zvt because the terrans are so bad at it. So where is all this hate for medivacs coming from? From cool I can understand. He is playing against the tip top terrans that have A level brood war mechanics.
Now I'm understanding why other races get kind of pissed when zerg swarms start bursting out in tears. They are crying over shit that they haven't even fought against.
Just because lesser skilled players don't do multiple drops, doesn't make it not imbalanced. One of my friends who plays Terran and actually follows the pro-SC2 scene (unlike 95% of the awful T players on the ladder) does multiple drops in like every TvZ game and he's only like 1100 rated (he also says he rarely ever loses to Z except to like baneling busts). The reason most Terran players don't do a certain OP strategy is probably simply because they don't realize how good it is, or they think to themselves "I don't have the APM to do that" when in reality it's not that hard to execute. Or they're just too busy 1-base all-in'ing every game and not giving a shit about anything beyond that.
|
On September 24 2010 10:28 st3roids wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 02:13 Odds wrote:
This is really sad- FruitSeller is one of my favorite players to watch. Hopefully Blizzard is paying attention. No its not
How is it not sad to lose one of the best Zerg players in the world? Who knows if he'll be as interesting to watch as Toss or Terran?
|
On September 24 2010 10:26 MythicalMage wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 10:24 smegged wrote:On September 24 2010 10:12 kNyTTyM wrote:
Hmm now this is pretty annoying. I don't like how people just randomly jumped on medivac imba. Many of the claims against terran seemed pretty grounded in the early game. 5 rax reaper, bunkering, lack of scouting, whatever. I thought everyone was agreeing with each other because they had played many games against these strategies and were sharing their understanding. Now we get to a freaking late game problem and people are agreeing as if they have gone through this exact situation many many times.
Number of times I have played against multiple drops in a zvt? 0. Number of times I have played against multiple drops against terran ever? Once against stalife when I played him PvT. Why? Because most terrans are so fucking bad they can't handle a clicking d twice for two drop locations. Probably 60% of tvzs don't make it out of early game due to the terrans options (this is just a guess). It has been quite some time since I lost a late game zvt because the terrans are so bad at it. So where is all this hate for medivacs coming from? From cool I can understand. He is playing against the tip top terrans that have A level brood war mechanics.
Now I'm understanding why other races get kind of pissed when zerg swarms start bursting out in tears. They are crying over shit that they haven't even fought against. The root cause of this problem though is the way that zerg are designed. Every zerg player can imagine themselves in this situation because they know how they have to play to have a chance of winning. "Survive and expand until Tier 3" is the zerg mantra. Because this is necessary, and every zerg has lost to a single drop at some stage or another, it's quite easy to imagine losing to a mutli-drop scenario. If you have to be on 3-4 bases and T3 tech to win, if you lose even one expansion mid-game you are behind. Drops have always been difficult for most zerg players to defend at all levels. Most zerg players are frustrated by being forced into one style of play (macro) or going all-in with a baneling bust/roach rush/6 pool style strategy. The risk in these builds is disproportionate to the risk in a proxy starport cheese/banshee rush/4 gate cheese build. Every time a pro complains about anything it is seen as an opportunity for zerg players to voice their frustrations with the game. The problems really stem back to Blizzard not providing well balanced macro mechanics. I have been thinking recently that spawn larva should be nerfed to two larva, but all early game zerg units buffed severely. This would nerf zerg macroing but make them strong enough to not have to worry that a single timing push will ruin them. It would also close the difficulty of play at lower skill levels, while keeping the rewards for solid macro at the highest levels. That sounds a lot like Brood War minus Scourge. What is the air superiority unit of zerg without scourge? Why, it's the corruptor. I feel a corruptor speed buff/cost decrease is in order. And if you make zerg units stronger, then you might as well call them Terran or Protoss units, and be done with it. You lose the feel of Zerg if you do that.
Zerg was actually mobile before hive tech in Brood War. You could contain a turtling terran, and not have to worry about "oh my god he could push out any minute". I'd like to see any zerg do a baneling contain in ZvT. Despite what Blizzard will have you believe, lurkers and banelings weren't overlapping at all. I'm not saying that they should bring back lurkers, I'm just saying that there is no effective way to contain or punish a greedy terran with zerg.
|
On September 24 2010 10:21 Half wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 10:20 MythicalMage wrote:On September 24 2010 10:15 MavercK wrote:On September 24 2010 09:51 Half wrote:On September 24 2010 09:49 MavercK wrote:On September 24 2010 09:46 Half wrote:On September 24 2010 09:40 MavercK wrote:On September 24 2010 09:37 Half wrote:
sadly no patch will fix my issues with the game other than a complete rework of the entire game. which i also dont think will happen. even after expansions i think the diversity of the races will still suffer.
Look I know you probably think your really special, but providing a little bit of evidence or support for your statements generally helps those who are less intelligent to better understand your enlightenment. my post beforehand? as im currently the maker of a starcraft 1 remake mod i've spent alot of time comparing numbers between starcraft 1 and 2. oh didnt see that.
i think zergs weakness stems from this. They just are not supposed to work like this. starcraft 1 had fairly clearly defined roles for each race.
Terran was not really hardcore turtling but they had very strong defensive capabilities with siege tanks, bunkers and turrets.
Zerg favored mass expanding and fast moving but cheap and weak units.
Protoss had a very hard hitting army. high health. high armor. fairly slow moving army.
in starcraft 2 they seemed to look at
Terran basically had mobility and harassment added to their options.
Protoss i can't really give my opinion they dont seem very different except for faster reinforcement of their armies with forward pylons and warp gates.
Zerg had alot of their mobility removed in exchange for units with alot more hp and armor
Thats a criticism against SC2 design. One I kind of share (but disagree with some key points). But it has very little to do with how the races cannot be balanced. i just dont think zerg will work without proper diversity. to sum up my post in 1 sentance What roles do you think zerg is missing that make the mu unbalance able? I don't mean to be overly argumentative, I'm just saying your making an extremely broad claim, and broad claims usually should come with substantiated evidence. i'd really like to reply to you but i guess im just not as intelligent as i think i am and cannot put my thoughts into a paragraph that makes sense. That might have been the best counterargument I've ever heard. "What do you mean? That's an awful broad statement." "I'm an idiot, excuse me." I'll be honest it takes a lot of balls to to concede an argument lol, let alone post about conceding it. So no hard feelings MavercK. :p Yeah, I agree. As much as I hate Zerg UP right now, I think constantly having a FOTM race would just be even worse for the games competitive future.
well i dont think im wrong. i just. can't argue it?
i could try but i'd more than likely come off looking stupid.
i just think blizzards decision to add slow moving but high hp/armor units with high food cost does not fit into zerg at all.
|
On September 24 2010 10:31 SlowBlink wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 10:26 MythicalMage wrote:On September 24 2010 10:24 smegged wrote:On September 24 2010 10:12 kNyTTyM wrote:
Hmm now this is pretty annoying. I don't like how people just randomly jumped on medivac imba. Many of the claims against terran seemed pretty grounded in the early game. 5 rax reaper, bunkering, lack of scouting, whatever. I thought everyone was agreeing with each other because they had played many games against these strategies and were sharing their understanding. Now we get to a freaking late game problem and people are agreeing as if they have gone through this exact situation many many times.
Number of times I have played against multiple drops in a zvt? 0. Number of times I have played against multiple drops against terran ever? Once against stalife when I played him PvT. Why? Because most terrans are so fucking bad they can't handle a clicking d twice for two drop locations. Probably 60% of tvzs don't make it out of early game due to the terrans options (this is just a guess). It has been quite some time since I lost a late game zvt because the terrans are so bad at it. So where is all this hate for medivacs coming from? From cool I can understand. He is playing against the tip top terrans that have A level brood war mechanics.
Now I'm understanding why other races get kind of pissed when zerg swarms start bursting out in tears. They are crying over shit that they haven't even fought against. The root cause of this problem though is the way that zerg are designed. Every zerg player can imagine themselves in this situation because they know how they have to play to have a chance of winning. "Survive and expand until Tier 3" is the zerg mantra. Because this is necessary, and every zerg has lost to a single drop at some stage or another, it's quite easy to imagine losing to a mutli-drop scenario. If you have to be on 3-4 bases and T3 tech to win, if you lose even one expansion mid-game you are behind. Drops have always been difficult for most zerg players to defend at all levels. Most zerg players are frustrated by being forced into one style of play (macro) or going all-in with a baneling bust/roach rush/6 pool style strategy. The risk in these builds is disproportionate to the risk in a proxy starport cheese/banshee rush/4 gate cheese build. Every time a pro complains about anything it is seen as an opportunity for zerg players to voice their frustrations with the game. The problems really stem back to Blizzard not providing well balanced macro mechanics. I have been thinking recently that spawn larva should be nerfed to two larva, but all early game zerg units buffed severely. This would nerf zerg macroing but make them strong enough to not have to worry that a single timing push will ruin them. It would also close the difficulty of play at lower skill levels, while keeping the rewards for solid macro at the highest levels. That sounds a lot like Brood War minus Scourge. What is the air superiority unit of zerg without scourge? Why, it's the corruptor. I feel a corruptor speed buff/cost decrease is in order. And if you make zerg units stronger, then you might as well call them Terran or Protoss units, and be done with it. You lose the feel of Zerg if you do that. Zerg was actually mobile before hive tech in Brood War. You could contain a turtling terran, and not have to worry about "oh my god he could push out any minute". I'd like to see any zerg do a baneling contain in ZvT. Despite what Blizzard will have you believe, lurkers and banelings weren't overlapping at all. I'm not saying that they should bring back lurkers, I'm just saying that there is no effective way to contain or punish a greedy terran with zerg. The "overlap" they talk about, to my knowledge, was splash damage, not containing/burrowed attacking.
|
[QUOTE]On September 24 2010 10:31 SlowBlink wrote:
[QUOTE]On September 24 2010 10:26 MythicalMage wrote:
[QUOTE]On September 24 2010 10:24 smegged wrote:
[QUOTE]On September 24 2010 10:12 kNyTTyM wrote:
Despite what Blizzard will have you believe, lurkers and banelings weren't overlapping at all. I'm not saying that they should bring back lurkers, I'm just saying that there is no effective way to contain or punish a greedy terran with zerg.
[/QUOTE]
I agree, Lurkers were pretty awesome as defensive units, how are you supposed to use banelings for defense? Hrmm..
Then again if Zerg could defend as well as they could with lurkers in BW i fear they would just power too many drones with spawn larvae.. It's tough...
The main problem with Zerg is the macro mechanic and unintersting units... Bleh...
|
On September 24 2010 10:31 MavercK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 10:21 Half wrote:On September 24 2010 10:20 MythicalMage wrote:On September 24 2010 10:15 MavercK wrote:On September 24 2010 09:51 Half wrote:On September 24 2010 09:49 MavercK wrote:On September 24 2010 09:46 Half wrote:On September 24 2010 09:40 MavercK wrote:On September 24 2010 09:37 Half wrote:
sadly no patch will fix my issues with the game other than a complete rework of the entire game. which i also dont think will happen. even after expansions i think the diversity of the races will still suffer.
Look I know you probably think your really special, but providing a little bit of evidence or support for your statements generally helps those who are less intelligent to better understand your enlightenment. my post beforehand? as im currently the maker of a starcraft 1 remake mod i've spent alot of time comparing numbers between starcraft 1 and 2. oh didnt see that.
i think zergs weakness stems from this. They just are not supposed to work like this. starcraft 1 had fairly clearly defined roles for each race.
Terran was not really hardcore turtling but they had very strong defensive capabilities with siege tanks, bunkers and turrets.
Zerg favored mass expanding and fast moving but cheap and weak units.
Protoss had a very hard hitting army. high health. high armor. fairly slow moving army.
in starcraft 2 they seemed to look at
Terran basically had mobility and harassment added to their options.
Protoss i can't really give my opinion they dont seem very different except for faster reinforcement of their armies with forward pylons and warp gates.
Zerg had alot of their mobility removed in exchange for units with alot more hp and armor
Thats a criticism against SC2 design. One I kind of share (but disagree with some key points). But it has very little to do with how the races cannot be balanced. i just dont think zerg will work without proper diversity. to sum up my post in 1 sentance What roles do you think zerg is missing that make the mu unbalance able? I don't mean to be overly argumentative, I'm just saying your making an extremely broad claim, and broad claims usually should come with substantiated evidence. i'd really like to reply to you but i guess im just not as intelligent as i think i am and cannot put my thoughts into a paragraph that makes sense. That might have been the best counterargument I've ever heard. "What do you mean? That's an awful broad statement." "I'm an idiot, excuse me." I'll be honest it takes a lot of balls to to concede an argument lol, let alone post about conceding it. So no hard feelings MavercK. :p
Because that's the most backwards mentality that could ever exist.
Yeah, I agree. As much as I hate Zerg UP right now, I think constantly having a FOTM race would just be even worse for the games competitive future. well i dont think im wrong. i just. can't argue it? i could try but i'd more than likely come off looking stupid.
Eh, perhaps concede was a poor word, I'm not asking for you to give up your personal beliefs :p. I'd recommend just thinking about it some more until you have it more developed.
|
On September 24 2010 10:04 Titan107 wrote:
The hatred on this thread just shows the stupidity of the community. If 1 person were to defend zerg (myself), he will be flamed to high hell for not following the general I YELL THE LOUDEST consensus.
I enjoy playing the race at 1650+ and dont give a fuck what anyone says about the race because it is not weak. Take your shitty mechanics and let the professionals be professionals, and yourself be the casual you are. Stop making excuses for your lack of skill.
1650+? Who are you again?
|
On September 24 2010 10:34 MaD.pYrO wrote:
I agree, Lurkers were pretty awesome as defensive units, how are you supposed to use banelings for defense? Hrmm..
Then again if Zerg could defend as well as they could with lurkers in BW i fear they would just power too many drones with spawn larvae.. It's tough...
The main problem with Zerg is the macro mechanic and unintersting units... Bleh...
Would still have to get to hive(In the state they were back in the alpha), or lair if they put Hydras back to T1.
I suppose Lair tech wouldn't be so bad, but Hive would just become another "Gotta rush to hive to live!" thing =s
|
On September 24 2010 10:31 MythicalMage wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 10:28 st3roids wrote:On September 24 2010 02:13 Odds wrote:
This is really sad- FruitSeller is one of my favorite players to watch. Hopefully Blizzard is paying attention. No its not How is it not sad to lose one of the best Zerg players in the world? Who knows if he'll be as interesting to watch as Toss or Terran?
Um my bad i edit it , i used to be a zerg fan i dont anymore.
i blame it solely on the game design to have 3 parts.
in this one zerg loose by default cause the other 2 races have been design to counter zerg as simple as it sounds its probably the reason.
\
also blizzard had 12 years of balance patches with bw messing up this much means that many key developers left the company.
|
On September 24 2010 10:36 Seam wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 10:34 MaD.pYrO wrote:
I agree, Lurkers were pretty awesome as defensive units, how are you supposed to use banelings for defense? Hrmm..
Then again if Zerg could defend as well as they could with lurkers in BW i fear they would just power too many drones with spawn larvae.. It's tough...
The main problem with Zerg is the macro mechanic and unintersting units... Bleh... Would still have to get to hive(In the state they were back in the alpha), or lair if they put Hydras back to T1. I suppose Lair tech wouldn't be so bad, but Hive would just become another "Gotta rush to hive to live!" thing =s
Wasn't that the way it was in BW, ZvT, trying to get the OP defiler?
Regardless, I think in the alpha the lurker den(?) was an upgrade of the hydra den at lair tech, which seems reasonable.
|
It also bears noting that Cool didn't mention what RACE he was picking, just not zerg. It's very likely he'd switch to Protoss.
|
On September 24 2010 10:34 MythicalMage wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 10:31 SlowBlink wrote:On September 24 2010 10:26 MythicalMage wrote:On September 24 2010 10:24 smegged wrote:On September 24 2010 10:12 kNyTTyM wrote:
Hmm now this is pretty annoying. I don't like how people just randomly jumped on medivac imba. Many of the claims against terran seemed pretty grounded in the early game. 5 rax reaper, bunkering, lack of scouting, whatever. I thought everyone was agreeing with each other because they had played many games against these strategies and were sharing their understanding. Now we get to a freaking late game problem and people are agreeing as if they have gone through this exact situation many many times.
Number of times I have played against multiple drops in a zvt? 0. Number of times I have played against multiple drops against terran ever? Once against stalife when I played him PvT. Why? Because most terrans are so fucking bad they can't handle a clicking d twice for two drop locations. Probably 60% of tvzs don't make it out of early game due to the terrans options (this is just a guess). It has been quite some time since I lost a late game zvt because the terrans are so bad at it. So where is all this hate for medivacs coming from? From cool I can understand. He is playing against the tip top terrans that have A level brood war mechanics.
Now I'm understanding why other races get kind of pissed when zerg swarms start bursting out in tears. They are crying over shit that they haven't even fought against. The root cause of this problem though is the way that zerg are designed. Every zerg player can imagine themselves in this situation because they know how they have to play to have a chance of winning. "Survive and expand until Tier 3" is the zerg mantra. Because this is necessary, and every zerg has lost to a single drop at some stage or another, it's quite easy to imagine losing to a mutli-drop scenario. If you have to be on 3-4 bases and T3 tech to win, if you lose even one expansion mid-game you are behind. Drops have always been difficult for most zerg players to defend at all levels. Most zerg players are frustrated by being forced into one style of play (macro) or going all-in with a baneling bust/roach rush/6 pool style strategy. The risk in these builds is disproportionate to the risk in a proxy starport cheese/banshee rush/4 gate cheese build. Every time a pro complains about anything it is seen as an opportunity for zerg players to voice their frustrations with the game. The problems really stem back to Blizzard not providing well balanced macro mechanics. I have been thinking recently that spawn larva should be nerfed to two larva, but all early game zerg units buffed severely. This would nerf zerg macroing but make them strong enough to not have to worry that a single timing push will ruin them. It would also close the difficulty of play at lower skill levels, while keeping the rewards for solid macro at the highest levels. That sounds a lot like Brood War minus Scourge. What is the air superiority unit of zerg without scourge? Why, it's the corruptor. I feel a corruptor speed buff/cost decrease is in order. And if you make zerg units stronger, then you might as well call them Terran or Protoss units, and be done with it. You lose the feel of Zerg if you do that. Zerg was actually mobile before hive tech in Brood War. You could contain a turtling terran, and not have to worry about "oh my god he could push out any minute". I'd like to see any zerg do a baneling contain in ZvT. Despite what Blizzard will have you believe, lurkers and banelings weren't overlapping at all. I'm not saying that they should bring back lurkers, I'm just saying that there is no effective way to contain or punish a greedy terran with zerg. The "overlap" they talk about, to my knowledge, was splash damage, not containing/burrowed attacking.
Right, but I think you misinterpreted what I was saying. Blizzard seemed to have decided "oh, since zerg already has and AOE unit, we can just completely remove the other one and nothing will change. Yes, Banelings and Lurkers are both AOE attackers, however banelings do not serve anywhere near the same purpose as lurkers. It is in this sense that they are not redundant.
|
On September 24 2010 10:39 MythicalMage wrote:
It also bears noting that Cool didn't mention what RACE he was picking, just not zerg. It's very likely he'd switch to Protoss.
i ve seen him more and more lately as terran in replays
|
On September 24 2010 10:41 SlowBlink wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 10:34 MythicalMage wrote:On September 24 2010 10:31 SlowBlink wrote:On September 24 2010 10:26 MythicalMage wrote:On September 24 2010 10:24 smegged wrote:On September 24 2010 10:12 kNyTTyM wrote:
Hmm now this is pretty annoying. I don't like how people just randomly jumped on medivac imba. Many of the claims against terran seemed pretty grounded in the early game. 5 rax reaper, bunkering, lack of scouting, whatever. I thought everyone was agreeing with each other because they had played many games against these strategies and were sharing their understanding. Now we get to a freaking late game problem and people are agreeing as if they have gone through this exact situation many many times.
Number of times I have played against multiple drops in a zvt? 0. Number of times I have played against multiple drops against terran ever? Once against stalife when I played him PvT. Why? Because most terrans are so fucking bad they can't handle a clicking d twice for two drop locations. Probably 60% of tvzs don't make it out of early game due to the terrans options (this is just a guess). It has been quite some time since I lost a late game zvt because the terrans are so bad at it. So where is all this hate for medivacs coming from? From cool I can understand. He is playing against the tip top terrans that have A level brood war mechanics.
Now I'm understanding why other races get kind of pissed when zerg swarms start bursting out in tears. They are crying over shit that they haven't even fought against. The root cause of this problem though is the way that zerg are designed. Every zerg player can imagine themselves in this situation because they know how they have to play to have a chance of winning. "Survive and expand until Tier 3" is the zerg mantra. Because this is necessary, and every zerg has lost to a single drop at some stage or another, it's quite easy to imagine losing to a mutli-drop scenario. If you have to be on 3-4 bases and T3 tech to win, if you lose even one expansion mid-game you are behind. Drops have always been difficult for most zerg players to defend at all levels. Most zerg players are frustrated by being forced into one style of play (macro) or going all-in with a baneling bust/roach rush/6 pool style strategy. The risk in these builds is disproportionate to the risk in a proxy starport cheese/banshee rush/4 gate cheese build. Every time a pro complains about anything it is seen as an opportunity for zerg players to voice their frustrations with the game. The problems really stem back to Blizzard not providing well balanced macro mechanics. I have been thinking recently that spawn larva should be nerfed to two larva, but all early game zerg units buffed severely. This would nerf zerg macroing but make them strong enough to not have to worry that a single timing push will ruin them. It would also close the difficulty of play at lower skill levels, while keeping the rewards for solid macro at the highest levels. Fair enough. I think somewhere in Blizzard's head Broodlords, a tier 3 unit, and banelings, a tier 1(.5) unit made up for the tier two lurker. Broodlords are the long range siege units, banelings the aoe units. That sounds a lot like Brood War minus Scourge. What is the air superiority unit of zerg without scourge? Why, it's the corruptor. I feel a corruptor speed buff/cost decrease is in order. And if you make zerg units stronger, then you might as well call them Terran or Protoss units, and be done with it. You lose the feel of Zerg if you do that. Zerg was actually mobile before hive tech in Brood War. You could contain a turtling terran, and not have to worry about "oh my god he could push out any minute". I'd like to see any zerg do a baneling contain in ZvT. Despite what Blizzard will have you believe, lurkers and banelings weren't overlapping at all. I'm not saying that they should bring back lurkers, I'm just saying that there is no effective way to contain or punish a greedy terran with zerg. The "overlap" they talk about, to my knowledge, was splash damage, not containing/burrowed attacking. Right, but I think you misinterpreted what I was saying. Blizzard seemed to have decided "oh, since zerg already has and AOE unit, we can just completely remove the other one and nothing will change. Yes, Banelings and Lurkers are both AOE attackers, however banelings do not serve anywhere near the same purpose as lurkers. It is in this sense that they are not redundant. The idea was that Broodlords would be the long range unit, and banelings the splash unit, but they left out the critical burrow aspect.
|
On September 24 2010 10:39 MythicalMage wrote:
It also bears noting that Cool didn't mention what RACE he was picking, just not zerg. It's very likely he'd switch to Protoss.
Protoss doesn't make sense since they have a even less chance against Terran. During GSL round 32 the most played MU was Terran vs Protoss and only 3 tosses made it. Terran had 90%+ win rate. If you want to switch race to get it easier to win then switch to Terran.
|
On September 24 2010 10:41 SlowBlink wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 10:34 MythicalMage wrote:On September 24 2010 10:31 SlowBlink wrote:On September 24 2010 10:26 MythicalMage wrote:On September 24 2010 10:24 smegged wrote:On September 24 2010 10:12 kNyTTyM wrote:
Hmm now this is pretty annoying. I don't like how people just randomly jumped on medivac imba. Many of the claims against terran seemed pretty grounded in the early game. 5 rax reaper, bunkering, lack of scouting, whatever. I thought everyone was agreeing with each other because they had played many games against these strategies and were sharing their understanding. Now we get to a freaking late game problem and people are agreeing as if they have gone through this exact situation many many times.
Number of times I have played against multiple drops in a zvt? 0. Number of times I have played against multiple drops against terran ever? Once against stalife when I played him PvT. Why? Because most terrans are so fucking bad they can't handle a clicking d twice for two drop locations. Probably 60% of tvzs don't make it out of early game due to the terrans options (this is just a guess). It has been quite some time since I lost a late game zvt because the terrans are so bad at it. So where is all this hate for medivacs coming from? From cool I can understand. He is playing against the tip top terrans that have A level brood war mechanics.
Now I'm understanding why other races get kind of pissed when zerg swarms start bursting out in tears. They are crying over shit that they haven't even fought against. The root cause of this problem though is the way that zerg are designed. Every zerg player can imagine themselves in this situation because they know how they have to play to have a chance of winning. "Survive and expand until Tier 3" is the zerg mantra. Because this is necessary, and every zerg has lost to a single drop at some stage or another, it's quite easy to imagine losing to a mutli-drop scenario. If you have to be on 3-4 bases and T3 tech to win, if you lose even one expansion mid-game you are behind. Drops have always been difficult for most zerg players to defend at all levels. Most zerg players are frustrated by being forced into one style of play (macro) or going all-in with a baneling bust/roach rush/6 pool style strategy. The risk in these builds is disproportionate to the risk in a proxy starport cheese/banshee rush/4 gate cheese build. Every time a pro complains about anything it is seen as an opportunity for zerg players to voice their frustrations with the game. The problems really stem back to Blizzard not providing well balanced macro mechanics. I have been thinking recently that spawn larva should be nerfed to two larva, but all early game zerg units buffed severely. This would nerf zerg macroing but make them strong enough to not have to worry that a single timing push will ruin them. It would also close the difficulty of play at lower skill levels, while keeping the rewards for solid macro at the highest levels. That sounds a lot like Brood War minus Scourge. What is the air superiority unit of zerg without scourge? Why, it's the corruptor. I feel a corruptor speed buff/cost decrease is in order. And if you make zerg units stronger, then you might as well call them Terran or Protoss units, and be done with it. You lose the feel of Zerg if you do that. Zerg was actually mobile before hive tech in Brood War. You could contain a turtling terran, and not have to worry about "oh my god he could push out any minute". I'd like to see any zerg do a baneling contain in ZvT. Despite what Blizzard will have you believe, lurkers and banelings weren't overlapping at all. I'm not saying that they should bring back lurkers, I'm just saying that there is no effective way to contain or punish a greedy terran with zerg. The "overlap" they talk about, to my knowledge, was splash damage, not containing/burrowed attacking. Right, but I think you misinterpreted what I was saying. Blizzard seemed to have decided "oh, since zerg already has and AOE unit, we can just completely remove the other one and nothing will change. Yes, Banelings and Lurkers are both AOE attackers, however banelings do not serve anywhere near the same purpose as lurkers. It is in this sense that they are not redundant.
You advocate using lurkers for contain, but that would no longer be remotely possible with SC2 timing windows unless they put lurkers on t1. Which would be obviously batshits retarded of course.
|
I think what people want when they say lurker isn't the splash damage, but rather the burrow aspect. The ability to attack from cloak. I think its a pretty big key that zerg is missing.
Also please don't mention burrow roaches, that is NOT the same thing. Not even close really.
|
On September 24 2010 10:43 Integra wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 10:39 MythicalMage wrote:
It also bears noting that Cool didn't mention what RACE he was picking, just not zerg. It's very likely he'd switch to Protoss. Protoss doesn't make sense since they have a even less chance against Terran. During GSL round 32 the most played MU was Terran vs Protoss and only 3 tosses made it. Terran had 90%+ win rate. If you want to switch race to get it easier to win then switch to Terran.
Yet the general consensus in Korea is that Protoss is the strongest race, according to Tasteless and Artosis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
