|
If you have criticism, you need to address the content, not the hosts. Idra and Artosis are 2 (1.5) Zerg players, but you can't point that out and then blanket them as biased. Respond to the content.
You can't tell them to "get 2 Terran and Protoss players". That's fucking obtuse advice. "Yo just get 4 more high level players to record with you." Yes, I think everyone sees the value in getting it, but it's not practical.
Respond to the content and use evidence / logic to back up your claims. |
1. Idra and Artosis ignore the fact that in the Reaper example they gave, Blizzard nerfed the unit into uselessness. After the combined nerfs of Barracks requiring a Supply Depot, and the Reaper speed requiring a Factory, Reapers were never used again in high level matches. Isn't this going from overpowered/imbalanced to underpowered? Yet, the duo never mentions anything like that. From their point of view, the fact that Reapers are now seldom-used units does not bother them.
I see no evidence that reapers are underpowered, honestly. I just see them as underused, as opposed to massively overused like they were before. I mean, they were supposed to be a raid unit, not a "contain a zerg so that we can double expand." Ghosts, Battlecruisers, and Ravens are also underused. Are you claiming these are underpowered?
If anything, I see it as evidence that the terran race still has a lot more variation and strength to it than we are seeing right now. In comparison, I don't think I know a high-end zerg that doesn't utilize every single zerg unit.
This is not necessarily a balance issue honestly, but zerg players are utilizing everything they can to problem solve their way out of situations (although I will agree nydus is way underused). Terran players are not. Several of their units just don't see play, because they don't actually need them for anything.
2. Idra and Artosis state that mass Muta was overcome by Protosses essentially "learning to play better." However, they ignore the fact that Stalkers were buffed to deal more damage to light armor units, and static defenses were also buffed, allowing them to better withstand Muta harass. From what they're saying, it seems like they feel everything a Zerg can do can be overcome with better game knowledge, control, timings, etc. However, not everything Protoss/Terran can do to Zergs can be overcome with better control, knowledge of timings, etc.
The mass muta complaints really were after the stalker buff and photon cannon. The real issue with mass mutalisk was reasonably recent, like after beta if I'm not mistaken.
And quite frankly, I would agree with those last two statements.
|
It's kind of annoying how artosis and idra are like "colossi are perfectly OK in TvP". Colossi are just as bad in TvP as that are in ZvP, it's just that terran has more harass options and can drop more to deal with it. Just building vikings and trying to stutter step your marauders will still have you lose by a decent margin. You simply can't engage that ball without coming out as a loser.
What about mech? fenix attempts mech
Look at those money EMP's, that's a huge investment in tanks. Does he have enough buffer? Not really, that's true. But all those tanks and colossi walk all over the ground units. I think you need more bio mech for that, like you really need marines in bunkers to take hits for the tanks, but the fact that you need bunkers pretty much means that you might as well not play mech on most maps and positions. It's too difficult to defend any 3rd or expansion. SS especially. Bio is needed as buffer, but they literally melt instantly to the 5 colossi that kiwikaki had. Those thors melted to the immortals, which got emp'd but still did enough damage to overcome all of fenix's tanks.
I don't like Fenix's decision to mech on SS. There are so many open spaces drops really would have worked much better, but that battle wasn't even close despite the large advantage of fenix.
Anyway, I feel like colossi should be reworked. I don't mind that they dominate bio balls, but mech play should be more viable.
|
A lot of what they say in this I agree with, and I'm a protoss player. I just feel for credibility they should get one of each race to have all the races represented.
Go grab Jinro / Huk and see if they're keen to join - I'm sure they are. Make it the Starcraft Grand Table of Balance
And +1 for adding video analysis. hehe
|
I have had the same thoughts about Colossus to the Protoss army for a long time.
Too much gameplay revolves around the Colossus.
In the normal progression of a game, especially ZvP, the Protoss slowly adds Colossi to the army/ball while taking a defensive-expanding posture. I feel that there is no reasonable thing that the opponent can do to fight the Protoss on even footing.
That, to me, seems like an imbalance in the current state of the game, and I agree with the opinion of IdrA and Artosis.
|
This is going to be good, i can tell. Im looking forwards to drunk shows, and guests in the future ^^
|
Watched the whole thing and loved it, hearing pro players talk about balance is going to be sex to my nerd ears.
|
They should do the Roach next. For 75/25 you get 145 hit points 1 armor and 16 dmg every 2 seconds. Aftering researching roach speed, they gain movement speed 3 off creep which is faster than the mobility stalker, and like 3 + 1.8 on creep. Each upgrade increase roach damage by 2 while the stalker only gets +1 per upgrade, these means that if Protoss is +3 attack upgrade stalker vs +3 attack upgrade roach the roach wins 1v1. the Stalker that costs 125/50 only has 1 armor on 80 hit points while the roach is barely less than double the entire hp + shield of the stalker and its all armored.
After tunneling claws is researched the Roach can tank an extreme amount of psi storms and just slowly move out of radius while regenning crazed amount as well as deny forcefields by simply burrowing under the forcefield.
|
On February 07 2011 15:36 NearPerfection wrote:
They should do the Roach next. For 75/25 you get 145 hit points 1 armor and 16 dmg every 2 seconds. Aftering researching roach speed, they gain movement speed 3 off creep which is faster than the mobility stalker, and like 3 + 1.8 on creep. Each upgrade increase roach damage by 2 while the stalker only gets +1 per upgrade, these means that if Protoss is +3 attack upgrade stalker vs +3 attack upgrade roach the roach wins 1v1. the Stalker that costs 125/50 only has 1 armor on 80 hit points while the roach is barely less than double the entire hp + shield of the stalker and its all armored.
After tunneling claws is researched the Roach can tank an extreme amount of psi storms and just slowly move out of radius while regenning crazed amount as well as deny forcefields by simply burrowing under the forcefield.
but the roach isn't supply efficient, which balance it out, nor does the roach hit air. You also shouldn't compare units across two races, since each are unique and serve different roles, hence stalkers shouldn't be compared to roaches.
|
On February 07 2011 15:37 5unrise wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2011 15:36 NearPerfection wrote:
They should do the Roach next. For 75/25 you get 145 hit points 1 armor and 16 dmg every 2 seconds. Aftering researching roach speed, they gain movement speed 3 off creep which is faster than the mobility stalker, and like 3 + 1.8 on creep. Each upgrade increase roach damage by 2 while the stalker only gets +1 per upgrade, these means that if Protoss is +3 attack upgrade stalker vs +3 attack upgrade roach the roach wins 1v1. the Stalker that costs 125/50 only has 1 armor on 80 hit points while the roach is barely less than double the entire hp + shield of the stalker and its all armored.
After tunneling claws is researched the Roach can tank an extreme amount of psi storms and just slowly move out of radius while regenning crazed amount as well as deny forcefields by simply burrowing under the forcefield. but the roach isn't supply efficient, which balance it out.
Using that logic Mass Void ray should be the best strategy in PvP because 2 void rays will kill 3 stalkers as well as 3 phoenix therefore if one of the P's get 200/200 void ray its a free win for the void rays.
But this is not done at higher levels because any good P player will simply push their cost effective advantage of blink stalker because stalker are more cost effective than void ray and end the game. So you would think Zergs can rather easily get econ advantage and then simply constantly do damage to the Protoss with their superior units and just never allow P to get a ridiculously pricey 200/200 ball.
|
On February 07 2011 15:43 NearPerfection wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2011 15:37 5unrise wrote:On February 07 2011 15:36 NearPerfection wrote:
They should do the Roach next. For 75/25 you get 145 hit points 1 armor and 16 dmg every 2 seconds. Aftering researching roach speed, they gain movement speed 3 off creep which is faster than the mobility stalker, and like 3 + 1.8 on creep. Each upgrade increase roach damage by 2 while the stalker only gets +1 per upgrade, these means that if Protoss is +3 attack upgrade stalker vs +3 attack upgrade roach the roach wins 1v1. the Stalker that costs 125/50 only has 1 armor on 80 hit points while the roach is barely less than double the entire hp + shield of the stalker and its all armored.
After tunneling claws is researched the Roach can tank an extreme amount of psi storms and just slowly move out of radius while regenning crazed amount as well as deny forcefields by simply burrowing under the forcefield. but the roach isn't supply efficient, which balance it out. Using that logic Mass Void ray should be the best strategy in PvP because 2 void rays will kill 3 stalkers as well as 3 phoenix therefore if one of the P's get 200/200 void ray its a free win for the void rays. But this is not done at higher levels because any good P player will simply push their cost effective advantage of blink stalker because stalker are more cost effective than void ray and end the game. So you would think Zergs can rather easily get econ advantage and then simply constantly do damage to the Protoss with their superior units and just never allow P to get a ridiculously pricey 200/200 ball.
why are you bringing up units used in another matchup when your argument is on your perceived imbalance of roaches in PvZ? Different matchups cannot be used to be compared due to different timings/ volatility (more so in pvp)/ racial abilities/ other units etc.
|
On February 07 2011 15:50 5unrise wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2011 15:43 NearPerfection wrote:On February 07 2011 15:37 5unrise wrote:On February 07 2011 15:36 NearPerfection wrote:
They should do the Roach next. For 75/25 you get 145 hit points 1 armor and 16 dmg every 2 seconds. Aftering researching roach speed, they gain movement speed 3 off creep which is faster than the mobility stalker, and like 3 + 1.8 on creep. Each upgrade increase roach damage by 2 while the stalker only gets +1 per upgrade, these means that if Protoss is +3 attack upgrade stalker vs +3 attack upgrade roach the roach wins 1v1. the Stalker that costs 125/50 only has 1 armor on 80 hit points while the roach is barely less than double the entire hp + shield of the stalker and its all armored.
After tunneling claws is researched the Roach can tank an extreme amount of psi storms and just slowly move out of radius while regenning crazed amount as well as deny forcefields by simply burrowing under the forcefield. but the roach isn't supply efficient, which balance it out. Using that logic Mass Void ray should be the best strategy in PvP because 2 void rays will kill 3 stalkers as well as 3 phoenix therefore if one of the P's get 200/200 void ray its a free win for the void rays. But this is not done at higher levels because any good P player will simply push their cost effective advantage of blink stalker because stalker are more cost effective than void ray and end the game. So you would think Zergs can rather easily get econ advantage and then simply constantly do damage to the Protoss with their superior units and just never allow P to get a ridiculously pricey 200/200 ball. why are you bringing up units used in another matchup when your argument is on your perceived imbalance of roaches in PvZ? Different matchups cannot be used to be compared due to different timings/ volatility (more so in pvp)/ racial abilities/ other units etc.
... I think more people think Roaches are OP than Colossi, and if PvZ is volitile it's because both races have an unusual amount of all ins, where in the other match ups TvZ and PvT its the terran wil almost all the all ins. Also, seems how both of the Zergs discussing are primarily Korean server players, and you yourself appear to be one as well I think it has more to do with current playstyle on the Kor server because European Zergs like Mondragon and Dimaga are doing incredibly well vs P.
|
On February 07 2011 15:37 5unrise wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2011 15:36 NearPerfection wrote:
They should do the Roach next. For 75/25 you get 145 hit points 1 armor and 16 dmg every 2 seconds. Aftering researching roach speed, they gain movement speed 3 off creep which is faster than the mobility stalker, and like 3 + 1.8 on creep. Each upgrade increase roach damage by 2 while the stalker only gets +1 per upgrade, these means that if Protoss is +3 attack upgrade stalker vs +3 attack upgrade roach the roach wins 1v1. the Stalker that costs 125/50 only has 1 armor on 80 hit points while the roach is barely less than double the entire hp + shield of the stalker and its all armored.
After tunneling claws is researched the Roach can tank an extreme amount of psi storms and just slowly move out of radius while regenning crazed amount as well as deny forcefields by simply burrowing under the forcefield. but the roach isn't supply efficient, which balance it out, nor does the roach hit air. You also shouldn't compare units across two races, since each are unique and serve different roles, hence stalkers shouldn't be compared to roaches.
Isn't supply efficient? 2 supply is the same as Stalkers, yet they win in a straight up fight and cost half the gas and 3/5 the minerals
o_o
|
On February 07 2011 16:13 Barca wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2011 15:37 5unrise wrote:On February 07 2011 15:36 NearPerfection wrote:
They should do the Roach next. For 75/25 you get 145 hit points 1 armor and 16 dmg every 2 seconds. Aftering researching roach speed, they gain movement speed 3 off creep which is faster than the mobility stalker, and like 3 + 1.8 on creep. Each upgrade increase roach damage by 2 while the stalker only gets +1 per upgrade, these means that if Protoss is +3 attack upgrade stalker vs +3 attack upgrade roach the roach wins 1v1. the Stalker that costs 125/50 only has 1 armor on 80 hit points while the roach is barely less than double the entire hp + shield of the stalker and its all armored.
After tunneling claws is researched the Roach can tank an extreme amount of psi storms and just slowly move out of radius while regenning crazed amount as well as deny forcefields by simply burrowing under the forcefield. but the roach isn't supply efficient, which balance it out, nor does the roach hit air. You also shouldn't compare units across two races, since each are unique and serve different roles, hence stalkers shouldn't be compared to roaches. Isn't supply efficient? 2 supply is the same as Stalkers, yet they win in a straight up fight and cost half the gas and 3/5 the minerals o_o
stalkers shoot air, can blink, and roaches don't, so the 1v1 situation doesn't tell the whole story (and a 1v1 between roach and stalker only favour roaches if both are substantially attack upgraded). You can't compare a versatile unit capable of both antiair and antiground to a dedicated antiground tanking unit, at least not just by having them fight a 1v1. In terms of cost roaches > stalkers true, but that's cost efficiency, and also as my previous point stated: you cannot compare the two units like this (I'm sure blink stalkers are more cost-efficient against muta harass than roaches). Corruptors > Mutalisks cost for cost, but does that mean that corruptors are a more useful unit overall? No. Supply efficiency is different, same supply roach gets beaten by same supply toss army.
*Edit, as the poster below me mentions: the efficiency of the roach also changes relative to each stage of the game, early game strong, midgame decent, lategame slightly weak. This is due to the units that could be brought out to reduce the effectiveness of roaches and complements with previosuly weak toss units such as stalkers. Stalkers are more useful midgame and lategame than early.
|
On February 07 2011 15:36 NearPerfection wrote:
They should do the Roach next. For 75/25 you get 145 hit points 1 armor and 16 dmg every 2 seconds. Aftering researching roach speed, they gain movement speed 3 off creep which is faster than the mobility stalker, and like 3 + 1.8 on creep. Each upgrade increase roach damage by 2 while the stalker only gets +1 per upgrade, these means that if Protoss is +3 attack upgrade stalker vs +3 attack upgrade roach the roach wins 1v1. the Stalker that costs 125/50 only has 1 armor on 80 hit points while the roach is barely less than double the entire hp + shield of the stalker and its all armored.
After tunneling claws is researched the Roach can tank an extreme amount of psi storms and just slowly move out of radius while regenning crazed amount as well as deny forcefields by simply burrowing under the forcefield.
I agree that _in the early game_ Stalkers are slightly UP, not Roaches OP. As soon as Stalkers have blink (midgame) they can easily deal with roaches. Though this changes heavily as soon as the protoss uses forcefields, in that case the Zerg can't do anything else than run and let half of his army die or hope that his burrow finished and the Protoss has no detectors.
I think it's balanced enough though.
The only unit (except for colossi) i think that requires some changes is the marauder. It's ok in mid- to lategame, but in the early game it is too durable and strong against Roaches and Stalker. Zerg can do ok against them in the early game using lots of Zerglings, though it's often too close if there is the right amount of marines, too. I've seen a lot of protoss struggle with them until they have two or more immortals or colossi. Reducing the HP by 20% and then add a cheap upgrade that requires the factory or takes a long time to research to get those 20% back would solve that in the early game.
I'd love to see Artosis and IdrA talk about the Marauder.
|
On February 07 2011 16:11 NearPerfection wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2011 15:50 5unrise wrote:On February 07 2011 15:43 NearPerfection wrote:On February 07 2011 15:37 5unrise wrote:On February 07 2011 15:36 NearPerfection wrote:
They should do the Roach next. For 75/25 you get 145 hit points 1 armor and 16 dmg every 2 seconds. Aftering researching roach speed, they gain movement speed 3 off creep which is faster than the mobility stalker, and like 3 + 1.8 on creep. Each upgrade increase roach damage by 2 while the stalker only gets +1 per upgrade, these means that if Protoss is +3 attack upgrade stalker vs +3 attack upgrade roach the roach wins 1v1. the Stalker that costs 125/50 only has 1 armor on 80 hit points while the roach is barely less than double the entire hp + shield of the stalker and its all armored.
After tunneling claws is researched the Roach can tank an extreme amount of psi storms and just slowly move out of radius while regenning crazed amount as well as deny forcefields by simply burrowing under the forcefield. but the roach isn't supply efficient, which balance it out. Using that logic Mass Void ray should be the best strategy in PvP because 2 void rays will kill 3 stalkers as well as 3 phoenix therefore if one of the P's get 200/200 void ray its a free win for the void rays. But this is not done at higher levels because any good P player will simply push their cost effective advantage of blink stalker because stalker are more cost effective than void ray and end the game. So you would think Zergs can rather easily get econ advantage and then simply constantly do damage to the Protoss with their superior units and just never allow P to get a ridiculously pricey 200/200 ball. why are you bringing up units used in another matchup when your argument is on your perceived imbalance of roaches in PvZ? Different matchups cannot be used to be compared due to different timings/ volatility (more so in pvp)/ racial abilities/ other units etc. ... I think more people think Roaches are OP than Colossi, and if PvZ is volitile it's because both races have an unusual amount of all ins, where in the other match ups TvZ and PvT its the terran wil almost all the all ins. Also, seems how both of the Zergs discussing are primarily Korean server players, and you yourself appear to be one as well I think it has more to do with current playstyle on the Kor server because European Zergs like Mondragon and Dimaga are doing incredibly well vs P.
ridiculous, i am toss and i feel pvz is ridiculously P favored. Roaches are ok, i think its ludicrous to think they are OP though.
|
I'm not gonna bother to read through this whole thread, I'm just gonna assume it is filled with people bashing you guys for speaking your mind.
Just wanted to show my support for you IdrA and Artosis for stating what you believe despite people flaming and hating on you. Keep the discussion going to help educate people who are unable to view something from another's perspective.
|
On February 07 2011 16:11 NearPerfection wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2011 15:50 5unrise wrote:On February 07 2011 15:43 NearPerfection wrote:On February 07 2011 15:37 5unrise wrote:On February 07 2011 15:36 NearPerfection wrote:
They should do the Roach next. For 75/25 you get 145 hit points 1 armor and 16 dmg every 2 seconds. Aftering researching roach speed, they gain movement speed 3 off creep which is faster than the mobility stalker, and like 3 + 1.8 on creep. Each upgrade increase roach damage by 2 while the stalker only gets +1 per upgrade, these means that if Protoss is +3 attack upgrade stalker vs +3 attack upgrade roach the roach wins 1v1. the Stalker that costs 125/50 only has 1 armor on 80 hit points while the roach is barely less than double the entire hp + shield of the stalker and its all armored.
After tunneling claws is researched the Roach can tank an extreme amount of psi storms and just slowly move out of radius while regenning crazed amount as well as deny forcefields by simply burrowing under the forcefield. but the roach isn't supply efficient, which balance it out. Using that logic Mass Void ray should be the best strategy in PvP because 2 void rays will kill 3 stalkers as well as 3 phoenix therefore if one of the P's get 200/200 void ray its a free win for the void rays. But this is not done at higher levels because any good P player will simply push their cost effective advantage of blink stalker because stalker are more cost effective than void ray and end the game. So you would think Zergs can rather easily get econ advantage and then simply constantly do damage to the Protoss with their superior units and just never allow P to get a ridiculously pricey 200/200 ball. why are you bringing up units used in another matchup when your argument is on your perceived imbalance of roaches in PvZ? Different matchups cannot be used to be compared due to different timings/ volatility (more so in pvp)/ racial abilities/ other units etc. ... I think more people think Roaches are OP than Colossi, and if PvZ is volitile it's because both races have an unusual amount of all ins, where in the other match ups TvZ and PvT its the terran wil almost all the all ins. Also, seems how both of the Zergs discussing are primarily Korean server players, and you yourself appear to be one as well I think it has more to do with current playstyle on the Kor server because European Zergs like Mondragon and Dimaga are doing incredibly well vs P.
yeah Dimaga managed to squeeze out a win 2-1 against whitera in a Bo3 (not to discredit this achievement though, impressive feat it is indeed to beat whitera in a series of ZvPs), and Mondragon managed to beat Mana in a Bo5, I don't think these are indication of zergs "doing incredibly well" vs protoss in Europe. You failed to mention Naniwa, Insolence, White-ra, and Socke's 75%, 75%, 69%, and 71% winrates against zergs in your post.
|
On February 07 2011 16:49 5unrise wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2011 16:11 NearPerfection wrote:On February 07 2011 15:50 5unrise wrote:On February 07 2011 15:43 NearPerfection wrote:On February 07 2011 15:37 5unrise wrote:On February 07 2011 15:36 NearPerfection wrote:
They should do the Roach next. For 75/25 you get 145 hit points 1 armor and 16 dmg every 2 seconds. Aftering researching roach speed, they gain movement speed 3 off creep which is faster than the mobility stalker, and like 3 + 1.8 on creep. Each upgrade increase roach damage by 2 while the stalker only gets +1 per upgrade, these means that if Protoss is +3 attack upgrade stalker vs +3 attack upgrade roach the roach wins 1v1. the Stalker that costs 125/50 only has 1 armor on 80 hit points while the roach is barely less than double the entire hp + shield of the stalker and its all armored.
After tunneling claws is researched the Roach can tank an extreme amount of psi storms and just slowly move out of radius while regenning crazed amount as well as deny forcefields by simply burrowing under the forcefield. but the roach isn't supply efficient, which balance it out. Using that logic Mass Void ray should be the best strategy in PvP because 2 void rays will kill 3 stalkers as well as 3 phoenix therefore if one of the P's get 200/200 void ray its a free win for the void rays. But this is not done at higher levels because any good P player will simply push their cost effective advantage of blink stalker because stalker are more cost effective than void ray and end the game. So you would think Zergs can rather easily get econ advantage and then simply constantly do damage to the Protoss with their superior units and just never allow P to get a ridiculously pricey 200/200 ball. why are you bringing up units used in another matchup when your argument is on your perceived imbalance of roaches in PvZ? Different matchups cannot be used to be compared due to different timings/ volatility (more so in pvp)/ racial abilities/ other units etc. ... I think more people think Roaches are OP than Colossi, and if PvZ is volitile it's because both races have an unusual amount of all ins, where in the other match ups TvZ and PvT its the terran wil almost all the all ins. Also, seems how both of the Zergs discussing are primarily Korean server players, and you yourself appear to be one as well I think it has more to do with current playstyle on the Kor server because European Zergs like Mondragon and Dimaga are doing incredibly well vs P. yeah Dimaga managed to squeeze out a win 2-1 against whitera in a Bo3 (not to discredit this achievement though, impressive feat it is indeed to beat whitera in a series of ZvPs), and Mondragon managed to beat Mana in a Bo5, I don't think these are indication of zergs "doing incredibly well" vs protoss in Europe. You failed to mention Naniwa, Insolence, White-ra, and Socke's 75%, 75%, 69%, and 71% winrates against zergs in your post.
Can you link where you're getting your stats? If its Progamer vs Progamer stats that you have some credit, if its all game stats i'm sure Dimaga etc have just as high percent vs P just because of the skill gap. Also, i don't think i have to mention the abysmal win % for P vs Z in GSL
|
On February 07 2011 16:56 NearPerfection wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2011 16:49 5unrise wrote:On February 07 2011 16:11 NearPerfection wrote:On February 07 2011 15:50 5unrise wrote:On February 07 2011 15:43 NearPerfection wrote:On February 07 2011 15:37 5unrise wrote:On February 07 2011 15:36 NearPerfection wrote:
They should do the Roach next. For 75/25 you get 145 hit points 1 armor and 16 dmg every 2 seconds. Aftering researching roach speed, they gain movement speed 3 off creep which is faster than the mobility stalker, and like 3 + 1.8 on creep. Each upgrade increase roach damage by 2 while the stalker only gets +1 per upgrade, these means that if Protoss is +3 attack upgrade stalker vs +3 attack upgrade roach the roach wins 1v1. the Stalker that costs 125/50 only has 1 armor on 80 hit points while the roach is barely less than double the entire hp + shield of the stalker and its all armored.
After tunneling claws is researched the Roach can tank an extreme amount of psi storms and just slowly move out of radius while regenning crazed amount as well as deny forcefields by simply burrowing under the forcefield. but the roach isn't supply efficient, which balance it out. Using that logic Mass Void ray should be the best strategy in PvP because 2 void rays will kill 3 stalkers as well as 3 phoenix therefore if one of the P's get 200/200 void ray its a free win for the void rays. But this is not done at higher levels because any good P player will simply push their cost effective advantage of blink stalker because stalker are more cost effective than void ray and end the game. So you would think Zergs can rather easily get econ advantage and then simply constantly do damage to the Protoss with their superior units and just never allow P to get a ridiculously pricey 200/200 ball. why are you bringing up units used in another matchup when your argument is on your perceived imbalance of roaches in PvZ? Different matchups cannot be used to be compared due to different timings/ volatility (more so in pvp)/ racial abilities/ other units etc. ... I think more people think Roaches are OP than Colossi, and if PvZ is volitile it's because both races have an unusual amount of all ins, where in the other match ups TvZ and PvT its the terran wil almost all the all ins. Also, seems how both of the Zergs discussing are primarily Korean server players, and you yourself appear to be one as well I think it has more to do with current playstyle on the Kor server because European Zergs like Mondragon and Dimaga are doing incredibly well vs P. yeah Dimaga managed to squeeze out a win 2-1 against whitera in a Bo3 (not to discredit this achievement though, impressive feat it is indeed to beat whitera in a series of ZvPs), and Mondragon managed to beat Mana in a Bo5, I don't think these are indication of zergs "doing incredibly well" vs protoss in Europe. You failed to mention Naniwa, Insolence, White-ra, and Socke's 75%, 75%, 69%, and 71% winrates against zergs in your post. Can you link where you're getting your stats? If its Progamer vs Progamer stats that you have some credit, if its all game stats i'm sure Dimaga etc have just as high percent vs P just because of the skill gap. Also, i don't think i have to mention the abysmal win % for P vs Z in GSL
Source is the TL database, and they are progamer stats, check it for yourself. Also, your claim about P winrate in gsl being "abysmal" is simply false. In the last season, the statistics are 6-5 in code S in favour of Z, and 1-4 in code A in favour of P, neither by themselves suggests anything due to small sample size. These statistics counts don't mean much by themselves, but if you look at the games themselves, most games in which Z win are from successful allins or defending an unsuccessful P allin, whereas most "macro" games are won by P, which suggests that there is something wrong with this matchup. source is TL database. Can you please stop making ridiculous claims?
|
Interesting, but honestly I would leave conclusions about imbalances to blizzard, I'm not saying imbalances should not be discussed, however as we can see here stuff like this is only spreading flames, plus, the discussion/show between idra and artosis seem slightly biased.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
