|
The levels of Zerg whining in this thread of an Idra proportion.
Most of the qq is kind of ridiculous and simplistic too. It's absolutely true that T and P can do a lot more off 1 base than Z. It's absolutely true there's some crazy ass all ins to be done. It's also absolutely true that zerg can actually -scout- some of these all ins. No, I don't mean you're always going to be able to sac an ovi and see exactly what I'm building, but as a P player, I don't know what a T is doing until i get my obs out, does that mean I think the game is imbalanced? No. You worker scout to gather info, not just for the sake of scouting.
Did he take a gas?
No -> Marine / scv all in, fast expand. -> respond appropriately.
Yes -> Steal other gas to delay cloak banshee type stuff, keep scouting the front for reactor hellion stuff, potentially sac ovi (if applicable), if continually starved for info at the front, if he hasnt taken an expo at a reasonable time, prepare for other crazy ass all ins (roaches are good vs most of these, as are queens, as are spines.)
It would take me 52 pages of how to respond to every single scenario in the game, but playing P isn't as different from playing Z in the early game as everyone likes to make it out to be. If I don't use the information that I gather with my scouting worker to make an appropriate decision, I can outright die or come out behind just like a Zerg can. However, since P is so "imba" according to every Z on the planet, this little fact gets swept under the rug. Zerg has an unmatched production capability in the early midgame, if you have to expend a few more drones early on to be safe from something, you -can- recover that that deficit. Of course you won't be as far ahead as you would be if you knew exactly what he was doing, but it's a game of limited information for a reason, with a maphack all this discussion would be moot.
Anyways, no race is imba, just gotta learn what to do in every possible scenario, use every little clue, etc. Let the QQ resume!
|
On May 13 2011 18:58 motbob wrote:
Spore Crawler Root Time
Air-based strategies vs. zerg are common due to zerg anti-air units coming out later than other races. Because of this, it actually makes sense for spore crawlers to be more flexible than other races' anti-air structures. If a zerg player is totally unprepared, we don't mind them just outright losing the game. However, what we didn't like was when zerg players still suffered considerable damage from void rays, phoenixes, and banshees, despite being prepared with spore crawlers that were slightly out of position. We decided to make this change so that it's somewhat easier to fend off these attacks, especially when you already have some spore crawlers in play.
As a side note, we don't feel the same way about spine crawlers, as there are being plenty of other anti-ground units zerg players can use along with the spine crawlers from the beginning of the game. [/QUOTE]
1st bold, are you serious blizzard? no other race has such an instant lose button, especially if going for early aggression, and not only do you embrace it but you openly condone it? wow..
2nd bold.. yeah.. I mean we have drones and lings right? no need to actually have air to ground when you have units that attack ground.. with that reasoning, i'm mighty concerned that protoss have cannons which shoot both up and down, when they (gasp) also have stalkers which "fill the same roll!" Such an ignorant thing to say on their part..
|
On May 14 2011 03:40 Endymion wrote:
1st bold, are you serious blizzard? no other race has such an instant lose button, especially if going for early aggression, and not only do you embrace it but you openly condone it? wow..
Actually both Terran and Protoss do have an auto lose button. It's called forgetting to put your depot back up or not putting your zealot on hold position. I'd say that is the equivalent of forgetting to build a spore crawler.
|
On May 14 2011 03:35 randplaty wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 03:20 MonsieurGrimm wrote:
but right now, if we choose safety (spine crawlers, queens) and possibility of aggression (zergling speed), we end up with an econ disadvantage... if we choose safety and econ (spanishiwa style) then we get out-econ'd by greedy players, and if we choose econ and possibility of aggression (no spines, less queens, no blind units, zergling speed) then we have no safety and die to allins. and since no race has good scouting atm we can't even choose in an educated manner, we have to blind guess which two we need.
zergs dont want a "gimme an advantage in everything build" we want a "allow me to stay even with my opponent without taking huge risks" build and that build currently doesn't exist. So do you think the problem is largely with Terran and not with Protoss?
the problem is with all three races. allins and greedy plays have been strengthened in SC2 (chrono, inject, mules, reactors) but scouting has not... it's a game design issue.
On May 14 2011 03:42 randplaty wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 03:40 Endymion wrote:
1st bold, are you serious blizzard? no other race has such an instant lose button, especially if going for early aggression, and not only do you embrace it but you openly condone it? wow..
Actually both Terran and Protoss do have an auto lose button. It's called forgetting to put your depot back up or not putting your zealot on hold position. I'd say that is the equivalent of forgetting to build a spore crawler.
I don't think he's talking about a mistake like forgetting to make something or forgetting to micro something, I think he's talking about guessing wrong and instalosing which is a problem zerg definitely has at this point in the game
|
I think it's unfortunate that they view the Thor like that. To say they made a mistake changing it the first time is just head scratching. Additionally to say they changed it because of "rare strategies" ouch.
The visual radius blocking scouting? Really? So 250mm cannon was leading to rare mass thor strategies which led to opponents having a difficult time actually "seeing" what units (mainly marines) are hiding under the thor? So therefore the change to an energy bar which requires 3 minutes to fully charge had to be made?
I honestly would have rather had them completely remove the ability. I'd rather my unit be lacking in the very strong single target channeling ability than be vulnerable to an instant damage ability that outranges it.
I don't know about anyone else, but I've already had a number of TvPs where the fight ends with just about an even exchange with 1 or 2 thors really low and with high energy only to be hit by feedbacks off of warped in templar, and finished off by a few zealots.
I also think that 3 thors might not work as well as colossus do, and if anything, small numbers of thors encourages scvs being brought along to auto repair them. And that in turn opens up a whole ton of threads somewhere on the internet complaining about them. I just really hope that heart of the swarm introduces units that are from design standpoints rather than this "lets make really cool units that are nice to look at but are impossible to balance the game around"
|
On May 14 2011 03:46 MonsieurGrimm wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 03:35 randplaty wrote:On May 14 2011 03:20 MonsieurGrimm wrote:
but right now, if we choose safety (spine crawlers, queens) and possibility of aggression (zergling speed), we end up with an econ disadvantage... if we choose safety and econ (spanishiwa style) then we get out-econ'd by greedy players, and if we choose econ and possibility of aggression (no spines, less queens, no blind units, zergling speed) then we have no safety and die to allins. and since no race has good scouting atm we can't even choose in an educated manner, we have to blind guess which two we need.
zergs dont want a "gimme an advantage in everything build" we want a "allow me to stay even with my opponent without taking huge risks" build and that build currently doesn't exist. So do you think the problem is largely with Terran and not with Protoss? the problem is with all three races. allins and greedy plays have been strengthened in SC2 (chrono, inject, mules, reactors) but scouting has not... it's a game design issue.
Doesn't Terran have a lot more all in options? Can't you easily scout protoss? Doesn't protoss have a harder time scouting Zerg than Zerg does protoss early game?
If it's a game design issue... then you're not saying that Zerg has a disadvantage. You're saying that it's a guessing game and you don't like that... am I correct?
|
On May 14 2011 03:42 randplaty wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 03:40 Endymion wrote:
1st bold, are you serious blizzard? no other race has such an instant lose button, especially if going for early aggression, and not only do you embrace it but you openly condone it? wow..
Actually both Terran and Protoss do have an auto lose button. It's called forgetting to put your depot back up or not putting your zealot on hold position. I'd say that is the equivalent of forgetting to build a spore crawler.
i dont usually say 'no' to anyone's opinion but i feel like do now. No, T/P dont have auto lose button. depot/hold-zealots can potentially cause you damage but if you have no units to defend the lings runby AND didnt scout that he has quite some amount of lings, is your own fault.
Z? if you didnt prepare for 2port banshee, 4banshee fly into your base you are GGed. read the post, Blizzard acknowledged that zerg has weak early AA.
|
|
|
On May 14 2011 03:46 MonsieurGrimm wrote:
the problem is with all three races. allins and greedy plays have been strengthened in SC2 (chrono, inject, mules, reactors) but scouting has not... it's a game design issue.
Because chrono, inject, mules, and chrono can never be used to build defense.
|
On May 14 2011 03:54 BurningSera wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 03:42 randplaty wrote:On May 14 2011 03:40 Endymion wrote:
1st bold, are you serious blizzard? no other race has such an instant lose button, especially if going for early aggression, and not only do you embrace it but you openly condone it? wow..
Actually both Terran and Protoss do have an auto lose button. It's called forgetting to put your depot back up or not putting your zealot on hold position. I'd say that is the equivalent of forgetting to build a spore crawler. i dont usually say 'no' to anyone's opinion but i feel like do now. No, T/P dont have auto lose button. depot/hold-zealots can potentially cause you damage but if you have no units to defend the lings runby AND didnt scout that he has quite some amount of lings, is your own fault. Z? if you didnt prepare for 2port banshee, 4banshee fly into your base you are GGed. read the post, Blizzard acknowledged that zerg has weak early AA.
Blizzard acknowledged that there was a problem when the spore crawlers were out of position. "However, what we didn't like was when zerg players still suffered considerable damage from void rays, phoenixes, and banshees, despite being prepared with spore crawlers that were slightly out of position. We decided to make this change so that it's somewhat easier to fend off these attacks, especially when you already have some spore crawlers in play."
So this patch fixes that. Now zergs are happy right?
If 2 port banshee were impossible to stop, why isn't that build standard in TvZ?
If you're P or T and lings are in your main, you auto lose. Your main army could be slightly out of position and you lose. It could be early game and you don't have many units. It could be that your main army is engaging the main army of zerg and you auto lose. Both mistakes are equivalent. They're mistakes that shouldn't happen and they're mistakes that if you make, you deserve to lose... just like if you forget to make a spore crawler.
|
I don't like the Ghost reasoning. They say
"We feel ghost EMP is a vital tool at the highest skill levels, and we didn’t like how players had to choose between ghosts or something else."
As if the other races don't have to make such a choice. For such powerful abilities you SHOULD have to make hard choices on how to spend your gas....
|
On May 14 2011 03:40 Endymion wrote:
1st bold, are you serious blizzard? no other race has such an instant lose button, especially if going for early aggression, and not only do you embrace it but you openly condone it? wow..
Cloaked banshees or DTs are an instant lose button for every race, if they are not prepared.
|
On May 14 2011 04:00 Treemonkeys wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 03:46 MonsieurGrimm wrote:
the problem is with all three races. allins and greedy plays have been strengthened in SC2 (chrono, inject, mules, reactors) but scouting has not... it's a game design issue. Because chrono, inject, mules, and chrono can never be used to build defense.
not when you were spending them on your economy or tech in order to stay even with your opponent.
On May 14 2011 03:53 randplaty wrote:
If it's a game design issue... then you're not saying that Zerg has a disadvantage. You're saying that it's a guessing game and you don't like that... am I correct?
correct, although I do think that if zerg guesses wrong they get punished harder.. so I suppose they have a disadvantage in that way.
|
On May 14 2011 04:00 randplaty wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 03:54 BurningSera wrote:On May 14 2011 03:42 randplaty wrote:On May 14 2011 03:40 Endymion wrote:
1st bold, are you serious blizzard? no other race has such an instant lose button, especially if going for early aggression, and not only do you embrace it but you openly condone it? wow..
Actually both Terran and Protoss do have an auto lose button. It's called forgetting to put your depot back up or not putting your zealot on hold position. I'd say that is the equivalent of forgetting to build a spore crawler. i dont usually say 'no' to anyone's opinion but i feel like do now. No, T/P dont have auto lose button. depot/hold-zealots can potentially cause you damage but if you have no units to defend the lings runby AND didnt scout that he has quite some amount of lings, is your own fault. Z? if you didnt prepare for 2port banshee, 4banshee fly into your base you are GGed. read the post, Blizzard acknowledged that zerg has weak early AA. Blizzard acknowledged that there was a problem when the spore crawlers were out of position. "However, what we didn't like was when zerg players still suffered considerable damage from void rays, phoenixes, and banshees, despite being prepared with spore crawlers that were slightly out of position. We decided to make this change so that it's somewhat easier to fend off these attacks, especially when you already have some spore crawlers in play."So this patch fixes that. Now zergs are happy right? If 2 port banshee were impossible to stop, why isn't that build standard in TvZ? If you're P or T and lings are in your main, you auto lose. Your main army could be slightly out of position and you lose. It could be early game and you don't have many units. It could be that your main army is engaging the main army of zerg and you auto lose. Both mistakes are equivalent. They're mistakes that shouldn't happen and they're mistakes that if you make, you deserve to lose... just like if you forget to make a spore crawler.
Okay, I don't even want to get into "who is weaker" arguments, I just want to point out that it seems rather silly to compare walling your main to having spores. One you might have to do if they build cloaked/air units, and will slightly set you back economically if you do it when it isn't needed. The other is needed every single game against zerg, costs almost nothing outside of APM and slight reduction of mining time, and is something that you generally just have to get in the habit of doing. Technically speaking not building a spore is not *always* a "mistake" if they do a good job of denying scout info and tricking you, but not raising the depot or putting a zealot on hold position, always, always is. You don't always know if you need a spore crawler, but you always know you need to wall off.
|
On May 14 2011 04:11 MonsieurGrimm wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 04:00 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 03:46 MonsieurGrimm wrote:
the problem is with all three races. allins and greedy plays have been strengthened in SC2 (chrono, inject, mules, reactors) but scouting has not... it's a game design issue. Because chrono, inject, mules, and chrono can never be used to build defense. not when you were spending them on your economy or tech in order to stay even with your opponent.
If he is going all in, you're not staying even, you're getting too far ahead economically. The game does not favor all in's, though some maps do/did.
|
On May 14 2011 03:40 Endymion wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 18:58 motbob wrote:
Spore Crawler Root Time
Air-based strategies vs. zerg are common due to zerg anti-air units coming out later than other races. Because of this, it actually makes sense for spore crawlers to be more flexible than other races' anti-air structures. If a zerg player is totally unprepared, we don't mind them just outright losing the game. However, what we didn't like was when zerg players still suffered considerable damage from void rays, phoenixes, and banshees, despite being prepared with spore crawlers that were slightly out of position. We decided to make this change so that it's somewhat easier to fend off these attacks, especially when you already have some spore crawlers in play.
As a side note, we don't feel the same way about spine crawlers, as there are being plenty of other anti-ground units zerg players can use along with the spine crawlers from the beginning of the game. 1 st bold, are you serious blizzard? no other race has such an instant lose button, especially if going for early aggression, and not only do you embrace it but you openly condone it? wow..
2nd bold.. yeah.. I mean we have drones and lings right? no need to actually have air to ground when you have units that attack ground.. with that reasoning, i'm mighty concerned that protoss have cannons which shoot both up and down, when they (gasp) also have stalkers which "fill the same roll!" Such an ignorant thing to say on their part..
Yeah, I've never seen a protoss lose to a cloaked banshee for instance, this is ridiculous.
|
On May 14 2011 04:12 Treemonkeys wrote:
Okay, I don't even want to get into "who is weaker" arguments, I just want to point out that it seems rather silly to compare walling your main to having spores. One you might have to do if they build cloaked/air units, and will slightly set you back economically if you do it when it isn't needed. The other is needed every single game against zerg, costs almost nothing outside of APM and slight reduction of mining time, and is something that you generally just have to get in the habit of doing. Technically speaking not building a spore is not *always* a "mistake" if they do a good job of denying scout info and tricking you, but not raising the depot or putting a zealot on hold position, always, always is. You don't always know if you need a spore crawler, but you always know you need to wall off.
I agree with you on all points that you made. Unfortunately, that's not the issue. I was merely addressing the "autolose" argument. All races have an "autolose" button. Merely because that autolose button exists does not mean that zerg is flawed.
|
On May 14 2011 04:14 Treemonkeys wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 04:11 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:00 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 03:46 MonsieurGrimm wrote:
the problem is with all three races. allins and greedy plays have been strengthened in SC2 (chrono, inject, mules, reactors) but scouting has not... it's a game design issue. Because chrono, inject, mules, and chrono can never be used to build defense. not when you were spending them on your economy or tech in order to stay even with your opponent. If he is going all in, you're not staying even, you're getting too far ahead economically. The game does not favor all in's, though some maps do/did.
sure, you want to have only a slight advantage against an allin player and devote the rest to defense. the problem is, as I said in my first post, that scouting is shit for all three races so it's incredibly difficult to gauge what your opponent is doing and react appropriately.
|
On May 13 2011 19:11 AndAgain wrote:+ Show Spoiler +"First, we definitely don’t like seeing Thors en masse. Due to the visual size of the unit, as well as a small pathing radius, Thors can obscure the other units in your army too easily. This can be problematic because it's important to know roughly how many units an opponent has when scouting. We want the Thor to be the type of unit that you add to your main army, and we definitely don’t want them to be the core of your army to the point where you strive to build as many as possible." That's an interesting view they have. It's the same reason why they got rid of the viking flower- because it made it difficult to see how many vikings there are. I don't understand it given you can select all the units and look at the UI to count the number.
only if they're your units.... you can only select one non-controllable unit at a time
|
if anything.. protoss have it way worse than zerg. You REQUIRE a robo to defend banshees. Zerg can do whatever they want, because as long as they have a lair (which almost every game past 5 minutes does), they are automatically prepared to deal with banshee or DT.
If you are a zerg, and didnt scout (which is easy, lings/ovies) and didnt build any spores or queens, then YES, you do deserve to lose automatically to banshee or voidray.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
