|
On April 19 2011 06:11 On_Slaught wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2011 06:06 dere wrote:
This entire post does not even account for the map changes. Which I personally believe has the largest impact on gameplay. I agree but if anything Zerg should be doing better now with these maps since zergs across the board wanted bigger maps. They got what they wanted but things have either stayed the same or gotten worse statistically.
I think that was the perception a few months ago that bigger maps would be better for zerg but I think that now that would be very debatable. In my opinion the bigger maps favor toss the most since it really can put an emphasis on how strong the warp in mechanic actually is.
|
If no patch will save the zerg from the inevitable threat of the deathball, i imagine it will take a lot longer for those more experienced to find a solid way to deal with strong protoss armies. Especially in the form of early timing attacks. The reason i say this is because of the nature of larva.
Drops / nydus are very risky (in terms of wasted resource) in my humble opinion, but it looks to be absolutely necessary, which make it an all-in of sorts (depending on execution and commitment).
The recently buffed and supposed golden unit, the infestor, helps, but with 90hp you better have better micro than your opponents A-move (esp if the 9 ranged colossi are headed your way). And with the investment of gas you better make them work otherwise your reinforcement of lings or handful of roaches might as well dig their grave.
I think we have seen some effectiveness with favoring tunneling claws before speed with roaches to circumvent high sentry counts which imo is a really decent way of dealing with forcefields.
Either way, in a game of PvZ the zerg can guarantee a win if they are just better players in my humble opinion. In a game where both players are of equal skill, the current metagame favors toss.
The one thing that is good is the various styles of experimental plays going on. And i hope its just a question of when not if, zerg can deal with these army compositions.
|
First way to tackle this issue as a zerg player:
-Stop whining about everything and anything to destroy every single LR thread. Maybe if people dedicated 1/100th the effort they put in whining posts to something useful for their race, we'd had the zerg renaissance,
|
On April 19 2011 06:13 Insouciant wrote:
I watched idra wreck some protoss players and their death balls just by going heavy baneling.
Its not the same as going against pros but if idra can completely wreck the ball using uncommon units against inferior players then its possible that a slight change in mechanics can make these methods work vs pro players too.
The death ball is strong and easy to make but I think that discovering the counter will unleash a satisfying wave of protoss late game tears.
Would stuff like banelings even be stable? What are you going to do when the Protoss equal of MarineKingPrime comes by and splits his blink stalkers like a gosu showing everyone else how to do it?
I say that not as whine even as I do love banelings in ZvP, but using them makes me nervous.
|
On April 19 2011 05:57 Noocta wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2011 05:54 Jerax wrote:On April 19 2011 05:49 Antedelerium wrote:
Definitely a copy-paste error. Regardless, OP does make an interesting point with the comparison of how macro Zergs used to be scary while the Protoss deathball strategy goes along the same lines. I highly doubt balance tweaks will be necessary to counter the deathball, but we'll see what happens in higher levels of play. That's how it always goes. Sooner or later, someone figures out how to counter a specific type of strategy. As good as MC is, sooner or later someone will figure out how to consistently stop his insane pushes. Sooner or later, someone will just figure out how to dismantle Cruncher in ZvP in convincing fashion (some pros probably can already and just haven't faced him). But balance tweaks have already been made. The infestor buff hard counters protoss death balls, being highly effective against pretty much the whole protoss composition. And yet every pro don't make them. Broodlords with infestors&anything support destroy any kind of stalkers/colossi deathball protoss can make. But everyone is still sticking to roaches hydra corruptor. :/
Actually, pros do make them from time to time. The issue is that the infestor buff doesn't hard counter the deathball. Or even soft counter it, really. Yes, you throw out a Fungal and you do 50 damage, not quite taking out the shields of the protoss army. And then the range 9 colossi kill all your infestors. Then they kill the rest of your army, too. The fact is that Fungal just isn't as strong against the deathball as it seems on paper. The pros are creative, skilled players - when infestors were buffed, I suspect the vast majority of zerg players gave infestors another go. And you say you never see any pros make them? That's because it didn't work. It still doesn't.
Here's an example. Huk v Idra, MLG.
+ Show Spoiler +Note how, over the next minute, the Infestors make basically no contribution to the battle. The stalkers take a big fungal, and then regen some shields, and then take another fungal... and they're pretty much fine. Those stalkers never end up dying. The brief immobility is meaningless since force fields don't let Idra take advantage of the very short-duration root, and the infestors end up dying without having really done anything except eat around a thousand gas. Idra still wins, but he had a 50 supply advantage from the beginning. If Huk had reached a 200/200 deathball, as these threads are generally discussing, I think Idra would have been obliterated there.
Edit: I'm not bawwing about the deathball here - I think that it's beatable but I don't think that infestors are the key. And I tend to get really irritated by people saying "It's so obvious that (obvious thing) would solve (x problem), but the pros never do it! They just keep doing the same old thing!"
|
I believe Fungal Growth has a range of 9 which is the same as Thermal Lance Colossi. I was surprised to learn that Fungals had that much range actually.
Recently I'm starting to wonder if Infestor/Baneling wouldn't do well against the deathball. The problem is that to survive up until that point is really difficult as Zerg, Infestor/baneling is really gas heavy. I'm not even sure if it's that effective. Especially with forcefields. It's really hard to say. ;s
|
On April 19 2011 05:54 Jerax wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2011 05:49 Antedelerium wrote:
Definitely a copy-paste error. Regardless, OP does make an interesting point with the comparison of how macro Zergs used to be scary while the Protoss deathball strategy goes along the same lines. I highly doubt balance tweaks will be necessary to counter the deathball, but we'll see what happens in higher levels of play. That's how it always goes. Sooner or later, someone figures out how to counter a specific type of strategy. As good as MC is, sooner or later someone will figure out how to consistently stop his insane pushes. Sooner or later, someone will just figure out how to dismantle Cruncher in ZvP in convincing fashion (some pros probably can already and just haven't faced him). But balance tweaks have already been made. The infestor buff hard counters protoss death balls, being highly effective against pretty much the whole protoss composition. edit: from the situation report 1.3 Show nested quote +The +30% armored damage change was more strictly targeted towards stalker-based protoss armies, as well as marauder-based terran armies. We wanted infestors to be more of a core unit in the ZvP matchup while keeping them just as useful vs. terran. The stun duration reduction change by itself didn’t allow these two things, so we had to make this damage change as well in order to arrive at the right place for the infestor.
Unfortunately, what's great in theory often doesn't work in practice. I, and I'm sure most other Zergs, have tried infestors against deathballs, and it just doesn't work. Fungals do quite a lot of damage, which is very nice, but Protoss units have a crapton of health+shields. If you send a few infestors in to fungal the deathball before engaging the collosus' 9 range allows them to bzarp your infestors in an instant, and the deathball can then back off until their shields recharge, before engaging your now smaller army without having sustained any lasting damage. If you use fungals mid-battle, the fight simply doesn't last long enough to rack up any substantial damage. You'd need the fight to last at least 13 game seconds, so you can throw down 4 fungals, in order for the fungals to change the tide of the battle. Most PvZ fights barely last long enough for two. None of this is theorycraft and whining, mind you. All this stuff actually happens. There may be an answer to the deathball, but it's not infestors.
|
Instead of Zergs trying to counter the deathball directly, they need to counter it indirectly. Don't let the Protoss achieve that critical mass. As a Zerg player, I have been shifting away from the "normal" roach/hydra composition and into a baneling/muta play(I will give credit to VTgIx because he was the first person I personally saw use it on Bitters stream) and it seems to work great. The muta ball can provide pretty good harass damage once you achieve that critical mass, being able to snipe 5-7 probes in one volley if mutas have +1 attack. Also given that fact that banelings/zerglings are very cheap both in food cost and in resources, it allows Zerg to expand around the map and so forth.
Because of the harass supplied by mutalisks, it weakens the economy of the Protoss in getting their deathball and when they decide to move out with their weakened deathball, you completely run over it with banelings/zerglings/corruptors(if you need them)/mutalisks.
Also doing attacks from two different sides, for example, mutalisks in the base, then suiciding banelings to take out their third, further delays their deathball push and allows you quickly get your broodlords out.
All-in-all: Zergs shouldn't counter the deathball directly, counter it indirectly. If you face a turtling protoss, do everything in your power to not let him get the deathball. I have found the VTgIx style does that perfectly.
|
On April 19 2011 06:11 On_Slaught wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2011 06:06 dere wrote:
This entire post does not even account for the map changes. Which I personally believe has the largest impact on gameplay. I agree but if anything Zerg should be doing better now with these maps since zergs across the board wanted bigger maps. They got what they wanted but things have either stayed the same or gotten worse statistically.
I think this is a good chance to point that players don't always KNOW what they want and don't always KNOW what they need. There are now bigger maps which leads to easier expansions. The problem is that easier expansions don't just apply to your race, but all races - and now getting that key third base on Protoss has never been easier.
It's good evidence in the day[9] argument that players should NOT focus on game balance and should instead focus on adaptation.
Humans didn't create the universe, we merely reside within it and adapt to it. And we're doing fine so far, compared to many other "worst case" scenarios that fiction presents.
|
beta before roach 2 food nerf: zerg late game > protoss late game
after roach 2 food nerf: protoss late game > zerg late game
pvz on small old maps: pre roach nerf mentality (must kill zerg before late game or be "overwhelmed"). early pressure is very strong anyway so games are decided by whether early push wins or fails
pvz on new bigger maps: early pressure is not as strong, someone plays macro game and discover deathball owns zerg, everyone copies deathball ever since
|
On April 19 2011 05:57 BlasiuS wrote:I don't think it's so much a metagame shift as it is the mid-game and late-game becoming more mapped out in SC2. A big reason why zerg has such a hard time taking out the protoss deathball is that getting 4 or more bases provides only a marginal increase in economy over 3 bases (as outlined in LaLuSh's macro analysis thread). Because of this, 4/5 base zerg doesn't really give much of an increased economy over 3 base. Also, once protoss gets a 3rd base, they have enough to make a maxed army; since protoss' maxed army is the strongest in the game, it's at this point in a game where protoss is stronger than zerg. And with the sheer amount of DPS, a protoss maxed army can steamroll a maxed zerg army AND any reinforcements that come immediately after.
What LaLush's thread does bring to light is that unsuccesful zergs are completely missing their timings, which are fairly small. I believe now that the 300 food zerg can be stopped they should be looking at the timings rather than the numbers. A trend I have noticed recently is that the zergs who hit right around the time they hit 170-180 food are against a 125-30 food protoss army. The unsuccesful ones (since the emergence of the deathball) are the ones who hit max and do a couple more injects so they can do a mass reinforce. Its such a narrow window for the zerg, but its one that every zerg needs to get to know if the metagame is going to shift again. If you hit that window consistently the protoss will have no choice by to transition away from it. This is kind of how metagame shifts occur.
I think the worth of Lalush's thread is to identify that current zerg styles are missing the mark rather than to use it as proof of imbalance.
The crazy thing is that if you read all the Live Report threads for tournaments and leagues literally 100% of the time protoss wins a game or match its due to race imbalance and not because they played better than their or opponent or simply ARE better than their opponent. idrA, according to alot of zerg players, has never lost to a superior player... only himself. There are so many fallacious connections floating around that you would think oGsMC is just a noob who couldn't win a single game as zerg. truthfully, if he had chosen zerg or terran from the outset he would still likely be a GSL champion by now because he has the mind of a champion and the execution and game sense to back it up
|
I think it's just a phase. Like when Zerg got roaches buffed, everyone went crazy calling for zerg nerfs but they didn't get nerfed and they arent complained about now. Or how toss had issues with mutas they learned a timing to kill them. I think zerg need to stop being greedy and rushing for 80 drones and start putting pressure on toss to prevent the ball.
|
Personally I always thought Protoss was never weak. In the beginning, most protoss lost because they were knocked out by early 1 or 2 base aggression. But then protoss players saw the strength of the sentry and with bigger maps it become a lot harder to 'cheese' out a protoss.
Lets not forget we didn't even start seeing decent stargate play until GSL 3.
|
Bobo_ that sounds like something i will try right away. Though one would think that should the toss turtle, it means their army is at home. Their armies usually have stalkers and most if not all games i play they get blink. I will have to look at the timings as to when the usual time and if i can get a big flock of mutas in time, plus i might have a problem with phoenix and cannons, but if you force them then they have to invest in cannons rather than their army which is the goal right  .
|
The OP made many good points here, but from a Zerg perspective I have to say this:
As Zerg being the macro race, the main goal for the other races should be to harass the Zerg, so he cant macro up and kill you with the overwhelming meat ball.
Terran for example has reapers/had reapers, Hellions, Banshees and Drops, etc.
Protoss has Cannon rushes, void rays, phonix, DTs, etc.
When the Zerg manages to defend all of this, he is in a good position against Terran. The game is nearly balanced in the late game in ZvT, in my opinion.
Against Protoss, fighting against a 200/200 army is in most cases an auto loss. And here is the design flaw! Zerg should be by definition mightier in late game than the other races, thats why P and T have soo many possibilities to harrass Zerg in early and mid game!
|
idra already told everyone how we should fight the turtle-ish ball style in an mlg interview. then he explained why even doing what he says will only find limited success, and in the end will be absolutely futile to attempt at very high level play where sufficient mechanics are present.
surely zerg and terran can defeat the ball and most of the imba whining is a way of people not dealing with their own inability to play well. this applies to 99% of the players here. with time everyone will come to see how the ease of protoss defense when one has competent multitasking is absurd.
this aspect of the game design is most likely only going to change in heart of the swarm, when new zerg units will be introduced.
|
MK just showed the world, while the ladder folk has seen aggresive play. See 5 rax reaper, 2 gate zealots.
|
too bad collosi outranges infestors[/QUOTE]
That really dosen't make that big of a difference if you are engaging unless you are engaging with your infesters in front (lol), i could maybe see this as a problem if you wanted to use Fungal as it was intended pre patch to delay armies instead of being a dps champ that it is now. This aside, Mondragon recently said that he would have won if he went pure roach infester, and i would link but i don't want to link something kennigit said yesterday on his twitter (skype conversation with him and mondi i think). But basically what this comes down too is using your infesters properly.
|
On April 19 2011 06:34 M1cha84 wrote:
The OP made many good points here, but from a Zerg perspective I have to say this:
As Zerg being the macro race, the main goal for the other races should be to harass the Zerg, so he cant macro up and kill you with the overwhelming meat ball.
Terran for example has reapers/had reapers, Hellions, Banshees and Drops, etc.
Protoss has Cannon rushes, void rays, phonix, DTs, etc.
When the Zerg manages to defend all of this, he is in a good position against Terran. The game is nearly balanced in the late game in ZvT, in my opinion.
Against Protoss, fighting against a 200/200 army is in most cases an auto loss. And here is the design flaw! Zerg should be by definition mightier in late game than the other races, thats why P and T have soo many possibilities to harrass Zerg in early and mid game!
Well one of the big issues many Protoss had before turtle-style became popular was that they couldn't harass the zerg - they don't have hellions, reapers or banshees, and the pheonix had a slower build time and was widely regarded as of no use. Void rays were much weaker against queens/uncharged too.
It turned out they didn't really need to, but that's beside the point...
|
So i am a bit curious as to what you mean by overrepresented by protoss? The only tourny where there is a large number of toss is TSL with 5/8 toss and 3/8 terran, however if you look at code s and a this season you will see that there is 13 terrans in code S this season which is larger than protoss representation. Also if you do remember assembly had a zvz final and both Code s and A of January had tvt finals, is this representative of balance? No, in fact in that code a there was 8/8 terrans in the top 8. So simply saying that Protoss is overrepresented is really overlooking facts, and if you are talking about pvp finals? Well having a mirror match up for finals really isn't balance related at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
