|
On April 19 2011 20:12 Cheerio wrote:
Clearly zergs can win zvp, but it doesnt prove it is balanced. I remember Idra and Artosis discussing pvt. Point was made that maybe early game advantage for tvp and lategame advantage for pvt is ok as it evens it out. As much as I dont like Idra he made a very good counter argument: it is very bad actually as one race will be desperately trying to survive early game with a mindset to get to the late gate for a free win, all stages should provide even possibilities for races in a balanced game. This is what is wrong with zvp. Lategame strength of protoss deathball pushes the zergs to finish the game in mid-stage. Yes, zergs can win, but it doesnt make lategame zvp more balanced.
Don't try to balance the stages. That's impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth.
There are no stages.
|
From what I remember ZvP matchup was very hard for zerg since the beta.
And bigger maps made ZvT easier for zerg and much harder to terran, but ZvP is still very hard, because protoss is even stronger on huge maps.
|
Blizzard has been only buffed zerg from the release and will eventually fix this game.
But guess what? it is ALOT BETTER if you discuss about it in battle.net forums instead of here. Blizzards doesnt follow this forum as much as battle.net forums.
I am serious, leave the balance discussions in battle.net forums. Dont try to talk about things here.
|
On April 19 2011 20:29 SweetenemY wrote:
followed by a wave made of any other unitcombo that fits the outcome of the first fight best, but instead they get roach/hy/corrupter again.
well arguing the point that zerg players are kind of stupid is not a step in the right direction
|
On April 19 2011 09:13 pockie wrote:
Spanishiwaa's play (especially on his stream yesterday) was showcasing the funday monday for day9, which was 12 lings, and nothing elsee except corruptors, infestors, ultras, and broodlords. Though it is a funday, it shows that zerg has the units to crush the so called protoss deathball, and its a matter of time before these strategies work their way into tournaments. Even with the most recent balance changes, its like trying to point out to zerg that they have this unit called the infestor, and they should use it.
So to the original poster - I disagree with you that the game needs a balance change to fix protoss. It's like calling the 1 base immortal push on scrap station invincible (the unstoppable build from beta lolll).
Post like this show why these kinds of threads are pointless.
Do you think spanishiwa owning people on the ladder who don't respond at all to what he's doing with an extremely silly build says ANYTHING about balance?
Personally I think Zerg could use a defensive siege unit, like the Lurker. If we could have a decent defense in the midgame we might be able to get far enough ahead.
|
Italy12248 Posts
I have a question for high-ish zerg players that have tried harass/drop heavy play against P. Do you feel like it's realistic to actually save the roaches/hydras you dropped (say, from 2 ovies tops), kinda like a terran does? Or are overlords just too slow/fragile to realistically expect that?
Thinking about drop-heavy play, in one of day9's dailies he mentions how often times players will drop a lot, but lose their drops, which means they don't do that much relative damage after all. To me, that's the biggest limitation of zerg drop play, when you look at it in pro games: eventually the drop always gets killed. So, is it realistic for zerg to actually save his drops, and if so, would that be what makes aggressive play superior to defensive macro?
|
On April 19 2011 20:48 Teoita wrote:
I have a question for high-ish zerg players that have tried harass/drop heavy play against P. Do you feel like it's realistic to actually save the roaches/hydras you dropped (say, from 2 ovies tops), kinda like a terran does? Or are overlords just too slow/fragile to realistically expect that?
Yeah usually ovies are too slow to retreat. But main thing is that zerg usually defends his drops with ling/blings/roaches, right? And all those units do not shoot air so of course terran is going to pick up his units. Now terran and protoss have easily accesible anti-air units that's why zerg do not try to retreat with drops.
|
Italy12248 Posts
On April 19 2011 20:53 Alpina wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2011 20:48 Teoita wrote:
I have a question for high-ish zerg players that have tried harass/drop heavy play against P. Do you feel like it's realistic to actually save the roaches/hydras you dropped (say, from 2 ovies tops), kinda like a terran does? Or are overlords just too slow/fragile to realistically expect that? Yeah usually ovies are too slow to retreat. But main thing is that zerg usually defends his drops with ling/blings/roaches, right? And all those units do not shoot air so of course terran is going to pick up his units. Now terran and protoss have easily accesible anti-air units that's why zerg do not try to retreat with drops.
Thanks for the answer  however, even in pvt against stalkers, terran drops have a shot at surviving...i guess it's different in pvz with void rays out though. Anyway, in that case a sensible change would be to speed up overlords a bit, both to help zerg scouting early, and to be a bit more effective when playing aggressive. But hey, i'm just platinum
|
|
|
On April 19 2011 20:48 Teoita wrote:
I have a question for high-ish zerg players that have tried harass/drop heavy play against P. Do you feel like it's realistic to actually save the roaches/hydras you dropped (say, from 2 ovies tops), kinda like a terran does? Or are overlords just too slow/fragile to realistically expect that?
Thinking about drop-heavy play, in one of day9's dailies he mentions how often times players will drop a lot, but lose their drops, which means they don't do that much relative damage after all. To me, that's the biggest limitation of zerg drop play, when you look at it in pro games: eventually the drop always gets killed. So, is it realistic for zerg to actually save his drops, and if so, would that be what makes aggressive play superior to defensive macro?
I'd suggest it's foolhardy to drop Hydras, considering how expensive they are. Zerglings have much more HP and DPS/cost, and most of the POINT of a drop is it prevents Protoss from fighting in the sort of formation (and with FF) that denies Zerglings/Roaches from finding targets.
On April 19 2011 20:43 hugman wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2011 09:13 pockie wrote:
Spanishiwaa's play (especially on his stream yesterday) was showcasing the funday monday for day9, which was 12 lings, and nothing elsee except corruptors, infestors, ultras, and broodlords. Though it is a funday, it shows that zerg has the units to crush the so called protoss deathball, and its a matter of time before these strategies work their way into tournaments. Even with the most recent balance changes, its like trying to point out to zerg that they have this unit called the infestor, and they should use it.
So to the original poster - I disagree with you that the game needs a balance change to fix protoss. It's like calling the 1 base immortal push on scrap station invincible (the unstoppable build from beta lolll). Post like this show why these kinds of threads are pointless. Do you think spanishiwa owning people on the ladder who don't respond at all to what he's doing with an extremely silly build says ANYTHING about balance? Personally I think Zerg could use a defensive siege unit, like the Lurker. If we could have a decent defense in the midgame we might be able to get far enough ahead.
Spine Crawlers, Infestors, and Broodlords all have superior range to the Lurker.
|
On April 19 2011 20:43 Cheerio wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2011 20:29 SweetenemY wrote:
followed by a wave made of any other unitcombo that fits the outcome of the first fight best, but instead they get roach/hy/corrupter again. well arguing the point that zerg players are kind of stupid is not a step in the right direction
Especially when most Zerg players are considerably higher level than P and T players.
|
Even though spine crawler has longer range than lurker did, spines still dont one shot marine like lurker did.
|
I think that is the same thing Mondragon was getting at when he said Roach/Infestor will beat Protoss deathballs... eventually transitioning into Broodlord Infestors, except you do it with lings and get the "deathball killer" army out much faster 
|
On April 19 2011 21:03 partysnatcher wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2011 20:43 Cheerio wrote:On April 19 2011 20:29 SweetenemY wrote:
followed by a wave made of any other unitcombo that fits the outcome of the first fight best, but instead they get roach/hy/corrupter again. well arguing the point that zerg players are kind of stupid is not a step in the right direction Especially when most Zerg players are considerably higher level than P and T players.
Untrue, and pretty much doing exactly what the guy you're quoting said is stupid to do.
|
On April 19 2011 20:39 Kirigix wrote:
Blizzard has been only buffed zerg from the release and will eventually fix this game.
But guess what? it is ALOT BETTER if you discuss about it in battle.net forums instead of here. Blizzards doesnt follow this forum as much as battle.net forums.
I am serious, leave the balance discussions in battle.net forums. Dont try to talk about things here.
pretty sure they've proven that they read TL actually O_O
|
On April 19 2011 20:58 Severedevil wrote:Spine Crawlers, Infestors, and Broodlords all have superior range to the Lurker.
Do any of those units hold off aggressive low-tech midgame pushes?
|
On April 19 2011 21:19 Vei wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2011 20:39 Kirigix wrote:
Blizzard has been only buffed zerg from the release and will eventually fix this game.
But guess what? it is ALOT BETTER if you discuss about it in battle.net forums instead of here. Blizzards doesnt follow this forum as much as battle.net forums.
I am serious, leave the balance discussions in battle.net forums. Dont try to talk about things here. pretty sure they've proven that they read TL actually O_O
where
|
On April 19 2011 21:06 Kirigix wrote:
Even though spine crawler has longer range than lurker did, spines still dont one shot marine like lurker did.
Lurkers never one-shot marines. They could, however, kill large clumps of marines very quickly. Of course, Infestors can do the same at longer range.
For that matter, Sunken Colonies saw a lot of use in Brood War, and I'm sure they would have seen more if they could get up and run around.
On April 19 2011 21:22 hugman wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2011 20:58 Severedevil wrote:Spine Crawlers, Infestors, and Broodlords all have superior range to the Lurker. Do any of those units hold off aggressive low-tech midgame pushes?
Your question is too vague to answer.
Obviously Spine Crawlers will defend a low-tech 'midgame' push if you're on two base vs. two base. If you're defending three, you will need mobile units, although Spines might supplement. How many obviously depends on what push you're talking about and when and what map and which third... >_<
Infestors w/75 mana take a very similar amount of time and money to tech as Lurkers did in BW. But Zerg players usually delay Lair much longer in SC2.
|
On April 19 2011 21:16 Dalavita wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2011 21:03 partysnatcher wrote:On April 19 2011 20:43 Cheerio wrote:On April 19 2011 20:29 SweetenemY wrote:
followed by a wave made of any other unitcombo that fits the outcome of the first fight best, but instead they get roach/hy/corrupter again. well arguing the point that zerg players are kind of stupid is not a step in the right direction Especially when most Zerg players are considerably higher level than P and T players. Untrue, and pretty much doing exactly what the guy you're quoting said is stupid to do.
I realize this is a stupid thing to do when I posted a very reasonable, objective "you don't have to nerf P and T to fix Zerg"-post on page 10, but I feel like saying this - so here I go:
1) Zerg is more difficult to just play "normally" - this is a fact, and few people will deny this.
2) When SC2 was refined to require less APM, a lot of fast, skilled players looked towards Z because they thought they would get more out of their fast fingers with Zerg.
3) Most people I know that were high level in other games, now play Zerg. Ie - better, higher quality RTS players have picked Zerg.
4) It is a common experience for Zergs on ladder to play harder, sneakier and more tactical than their opponents, and lose to simple, mindless, cookie-cutter builds by P and T.
5) Most intelligent commentators and people with insight in SC2, are Zerg players.
We have some awesome Ts and Ps out there, by all means, but most Zergs are playing on "very hard"-mode. Zergs have tried to master the game on "very hard" mode for almost a year now, and are of course in the face of repeated defeat, much better trained than most Ts and Ps.
Based on player skill alone, Zerg should be the dominating race as it was in the early / mid beta.
|
On April 19 2011 21:19 Vei wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2011 20:39 Kirigix wrote:
Blizzard has been only buffed zerg from the release and will eventually fix this game.
But guess what? it is ALOT BETTER if you discuss about it in battle.net forums instead of here. Blizzards doesnt follow this forum as much as battle.net forums.
I am serious, leave the balance discussions in battle.net forums. Dont try to talk about things here. pretty sure they've proven that they read TL actually O_O
On April 19 2011 20:39 Kirigix wrote:
Blizzard has been only buffed zerg from the release and will eventually fix this game.
But guess what? it is ALOT BETTER if you discuss about it in battle.net forums instead of here. Blizzards doesnt follow this forum as much as battle.net forums.
I am serious, leave the balance discussions in battle.net forums. Dont try to talk about things here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
