|
On June 10 2011 14:11 shinyA wrote:Like, I never really "rage" about imbalance, even when P, at the start, was weaker than T and Z because back then I could look at a game that I lost and figure out why I lost and how to react in situations to change the outcome. But now, PvZ is literally impossible to win. On any map not named Shakuras or Tal Darim, I can't secure a natural without going either 3WG/SG or 3WG/DT both of which are countered by a simple spore and both builds pretty much give them a timing to kill me or give them free reign to just mass drone to 70 and then non stop attack me. The timing Zerg's can hit are ridiculously broken, 2 base roach push after rushing 45 drones is broken. 2 base hydra ling is broken if P does any sort of WG expand whether it be a void ray or dark templar. Any sort of muta / ling build can coin flip win if you try to go early robo, if that happens P will never get a third up. And even if I just do a 3 WG expand and they don't losirafuck me they can just take 4 base and build a zillion drones and unless I do some all in gateway timing I can't stop it. I think it's hilarious though how when Zergs were crying about Protoss being imba ZvP was still a winnable matchup for them, it wasn't impossible and every competent Protoss was saying the same thing .. " you aren't doin it right". Now though, win PvZ is unwinnable you hardly hear anything from the P players. The problem is though, I've gone over everything and there ARE NO BUILDS THAT DON'T PUT ME AT A NEAR UNWINNABLE DISADVANTAGE unless I'm going all in of course. It's such a joke, I watch games where I play perfectly and I can't figure out how to change anything or why I lost other than the fact that Z is broken. The shitty zerg's I'm losing to ... it's such a joke. I hate this game 
Protoss here. I hate it when anyone calls something broken, even more so when a fellow Toss does because it gives me less justification to make fun of the "Zerg QQ" stereotype 
Whenever someone gives their "I've tried everything and nothing works, boo hoo! Race X is broken! QQ" sob story, it makes my head hurt. How do you think, at the top level, Protoss players beat Zergs, Zergs far better than the ones you're facing? I know it's tempting to give in to frustration, but come on... there is so much evidence that PvZ isn't broken that using your own experiences, no matter how frustrating they may be, to justify your "PvZ is broken" opinion is flat out wrong (this argument applies to anyone whining about a broken matchup.. it's very likely that it isn't). Why not post to the strategy section with replays? You're obviously doing stuff wrong.
|
I learned today to never trust someone with the word cheese or a 4chan meme in their name.
|
On June 10 2011 16:19 HolyArrow wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2011 14:11 shinyA wrote:Like, I never really "rage" about imbalance, even when P, at the start, was weaker than T and Z because back then I could look at a game that I lost and figure out why I lost and how to react in situations to change the outcome. But now, PvZ is literally impossible to win. On any map not named Shakuras or Tal Darim, I can't secure a natural without going either 3WG/SG or 3WG/DT both of which are countered by a simple spore and both builds pretty much give them a timing to kill me or give them free reign to just mass drone to 70 and then non stop attack me. The timing Zerg's can hit are ridiculously broken, 2 base roach push after rushing 45 drones is broken. 2 base hydra ling is broken if P does any sort of WG expand whether it be a void ray or dark templar. Any sort of muta / ling build can coin flip win if you try to go early robo, if that happens P will never get a third up. And even if I just do a 3 WG expand and they don't losirafuck me they can just take 4 base and build a zillion drones and unless I do some all in gateway timing I can't stop it. I think it's hilarious though how when Zergs were crying about Protoss being imba ZvP was still a winnable matchup for them, it wasn't impossible and every competent Protoss was saying the same thing .. " you aren't doin it right". Now though, win PvZ is unwinnable you hardly hear anything from the P players. The problem is though, I've gone over everything and there ARE NO BUILDS THAT DON'T PUT ME AT A NEAR UNWINNABLE DISADVANTAGE unless I'm going all in of course. It's such a joke, I watch games where I play perfectly and I can't figure out how to change anything or why I lost other than the fact that Z is broken. The shitty zerg's I'm losing to ... it's such a joke. I hate this game Protoss here. I hate it when anyone calls something broken, even more so when a fellow Toss does because it gives me less justification to make fun of the "Zerg QQ" stereotype Whenever someone gives their "I've tried everything and nothing works, boo hoo! Race X is broken! QQ" sob story, it makes my head hurt. How do you think, at the top level, Protoss players beat Zergs, Zergs far better than the ones you're facing? I know it's tempting to give in to frustration, but come on... there is so much evidence that PvZ isn't broken that using your own experiences, no matter how frustrating they may be, to justify your "PvZ is broken" opinion is flat out wrong (this argument applies to anyone whining about a broken matchup.. it's very likely that it isn't). Why not post to the strategy section with replays? You're obviously doing stuff wrong.
Protoss' don't win at a high level.
I'm grandmaster and I play against top zergs all the time?
|
I've noticed from watching streams/replays that tosses in their wallin always put the gateway tugging the wall so it doesnt have the zealot by it. It can't be a coincidence that pretty much all of them do this - but I don't know why. Could somebody enlighten me (I realize it is a bit of a tiny detail in the grand scheme of things)?
|
On June 10 2011 17:05 shinyA wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2011 16:19 HolyArrow wrote:On June 10 2011 14:11 shinyA wrote:Like, I never really "rage" about imbalance, even when P, at the start, was weaker than T and Z because back then I could look at a game that I lost and figure out why I lost and how to react in situations to change the outcome. But now, PvZ is literally impossible to win. On any map not named Shakuras or Tal Darim, I can't secure a natural without going either 3WG/SG or 3WG/DT both of which are countered by a simple spore and both builds pretty much give them a timing to kill me or give them free reign to just mass drone to 70 and then non stop attack me. The timing Zerg's can hit are ridiculously broken, 2 base roach push after rushing 45 drones is broken. 2 base hydra ling is broken if P does any sort of WG expand whether it be a void ray or dark templar. Any sort of muta / ling build can coin flip win if you try to go early robo, if that happens P will never get a third up. And even if I just do a 3 WG expand and they don't losirafuck me they can just take 4 base and build a zillion drones and unless I do some all in gateway timing I can't stop it. I think it's hilarious though how when Zergs were crying about Protoss being imba ZvP was still a winnable matchup for them, it wasn't impossible and every competent Protoss was saying the same thing .. " you aren't doin it right". Now though, win PvZ is unwinnable you hardly hear anything from the P players. The problem is though, I've gone over everything and there ARE NO BUILDS THAT DON'T PUT ME AT A NEAR UNWINNABLE DISADVANTAGE unless I'm going all in of course. It's such a joke, I watch games where I play perfectly and I can't figure out how to change anything or why I lost other than the fact that Z is broken. The shitty zerg's I'm losing to ... it's such a joke. I hate this game Protoss here. I hate it when anyone calls something broken, even more so when a fellow Toss does because it gives me less justification to make fun of the "Zerg QQ" stereotype Whenever someone gives their "I've tried everything and nothing works, boo hoo! Race X is broken! QQ" sob story, it makes my head hurt. How do you think, at the top level, Protoss players beat Zergs, Zergs far better than the ones you're facing? I know it's tempting to give in to frustration, but come on... there is so much evidence that PvZ isn't broken that using your own experiences, no matter how frustrating they may be, to justify your "PvZ is broken" opinion is flat out wrong (this argument applies to anyone whining about a broken matchup.. it's very likely that it isn't). Why not post to the strategy section with replays? You're obviously doing stuff wrong. Protoss' don't win at a high level. I'm grandmaster and I play against top zergs all the time?
No offence shinyA, but it sounds like the people your playing are just better then you. Why does other top protosses win over top zergs all the time and vice versa? Don't use yourself as an example to call out an imbalance please, it's honestly pretty stupid.
|
On June 10 2011 17:57 .Enigma. wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2011 17:05 shinyA wrote:On June 10 2011 16:19 HolyArrow wrote:On June 10 2011 14:11 shinyA wrote:Like, I never really "rage" about imbalance, even when P, at the start, was weaker than T and Z because back then I could look at a game that I lost and figure out why I lost and how to react in situations to change the outcome. But now, PvZ is literally impossible to win. On any map not named Shakuras or Tal Darim, I can't secure a natural without going either 3WG/SG or 3WG/DT both of which are countered by a simple spore and both builds pretty much give them a timing to kill me or give them free reign to just mass drone to 70 and then non stop attack me. The timing Zerg's can hit are ridiculously broken, 2 base roach push after rushing 45 drones is broken. 2 base hydra ling is broken if P does any sort of WG expand whether it be a void ray or dark templar. Any sort of muta / ling build can coin flip win if you try to go early robo, if that happens P will never get a third up. And even if I just do a 3 WG expand and they don't losirafuck me they can just take 4 base and build a zillion drones and unless I do some all in gateway timing I can't stop it. I think it's hilarious though how when Zergs were crying about Protoss being imba ZvP was still a winnable matchup for them, it wasn't impossible and every competent Protoss was saying the same thing .. " you aren't doin it right". Now though, win PvZ is unwinnable you hardly hear anything from the P players. The problem is though, I've gone over everything and there ARE NO BUILDS THAT DON'T PUT ME AT A NEAR UNWINNABLE DISADVANTAGE unless I'm going all in of course. It's such a joke, I watch games where I play perfectly and I can't figure out how to change anything or why I lost other than the fact that Z is broken. The shitty zerg's I'm losing to ... it's such a joke. I hate this game Protoss here. I hate it when anyone calls something broken, even more so when a fellow Toss does because it gives me less justification to make fun of the "Zerg QQ" stereotype Whenever someone gives their "I've tried everything and nothing works, boo hoo! Race X is broken! QQ" sob story, it makes my head hurt. How do you think, at the top level, Protoss players beat Zergs, Zergs far better than the ones you're facing? I know it's tempting to give in to frustration, but come on... there is so much evidence that PvZ isn't broken that using your own experiences, no matter how frustrating they may be, to justify your "PvZ is broken" opinion is flat out wrong (this argument applies to anyone whining about a broken matchup.. it's very likely that it isn't). Why not post to the strategy section with replays? You're obviously doing stuff wrong. Protoss' don't win at a high level. I'm grandmaster and I play against top zergs all the time? No offence shinyA, but it sounds like the people your playing are just better then you. Why does other top protosses win over top zergs all the time and vice versa? Don't use yourself as an example to call out an imbalance please, it's honestly pretty stupid.
Don't care what it sounds like, I've beaten and played almost every "top" zerg player that plays on NA. But please, show me examples of P's beating Z's. Why is there only 1 P in the top 16 of the super tournament? Why did Z do so well at MLG?
Counter my points, I listed why I feel the way I do and you don't attempt to refute any of my arguments. What's "honestly pretty stupid" is you making assumptions when you really have no clue what you're talking about =)
|
Pretty funny you bring up the NA server to someone from Sweden.
The questions still there. Many people in the grandmaster leagues are Protoss. I don't see any imbalance, just older build orders being countered after a few months of analysis.
On June 10 2011 17:21 Complete wrote:
I've noticed from watching streams/replays that tosses in their wallin always put the gateway tugging the wall so it doesnt have the zealot by it. It can't be a coincidence that pretty much all of them do this - but I don't know why. Could somebody enlighten me (I realize it is a bit of a tiny detail in the grand scheme of things)?
Which is safer?
I'd rather have one direction units can come in from than 2 10/10 times.
|
Can anyone post replays with TIES ?
never seen a tie in SC2 !!
thx
|
the irradiate thing. i think they could have it in sc2 but maybe with a little bit less Area of effect. cause if units clump more, hell just decrease the area of damage.
Hunter seeker missile wasn't a good replacement at all.
|
On June 10 2011 18:16 shinyA wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2011 17:57 .Enigma. wrote:On June 10 2011 17:05 shinyA wrote:On June 10 2011 16:19 HolyArrow wrote:On June 10 2011 14:11 shinyA wrote:Like, I never really "rage" about imbalance, even when P, at the start, was weaker than T and Z because back then I could look at a game that I lost and figure out why I lost and how to react in situations to change the outcome. But now, PvZ is literally impossible to win. On any map not named Shakuras or Tal Darim, I can't secure a natural without going either 3WG/SG or 3WG/DT both of which are countered by a simple spore and both builds pretty much give them a timing to kill me or give them free reign to just mass drone to 70 and then non stop attack me. The timing Zerg's can hit are ridiculously broken, 2 base roach push after rushing 45 drones is broken. 2 base hydra ling is broken if P does any sort of WG expand whether it be a void ray or dark templar. Any sort of muta / ling build can coin flip win if you try to go early robo, if that happens P will never get a third up. And even if I just do a 3 WG expand and they don't losirafuck me they can just take 4 base and build a zillion drones and unless I do some all in gateway timing I can't stop it. I think it's hilarious though how when Zergs were crying about Protoss being imba ZvP was still a winnable matchup for them, it wasn't impossible and every competent Protoss was saying the same thing .. " you aren't doin it right". Now though, win PvZ is unwinnable you hardly hear anything from the P players. The problem is though, I've gone over everything and there ARE NO BUILDS THAT DON'T PUT ME AT A NEAR UNWINNABLE DISADVANTAGE unless I'm going all in of course. It's such a joke, I watch games where I play perfectly and I can't figure out how to change anything or why I lost other than the fact that Z is broken. The shitty zerg's I'm losing to ... it's such a joke. I hate this game Protoss here. I hate it when anyone calls something broken, even more so when a fellow Toss does because it gives me less justification to make fun of the "Zerg QQ" stereotype Whenever someone gives their "I've tried everything and nothing works, boo hoo! Race X is broken! QQ" sob story, it makes my head hurt. How do you think, at the top level, Protoss players beat Zergs, Zergs far better than the ones you're facing? I know it's tempting to give in to frustration, but come on... there is so much evidence that PvZ isn't broken that using your own experiences, no matter how frustrating they may be, to justify your "PvZ is broken" opinion is flat out wrong (this argument applies to anyone whining about a broken matchup.. it's very likely that it isn't). Why not post to the strategy section with replays? You're obviously doing stuff wrong. Protoss' don't win at a high level. I'm grandmaster and I play against top zergs all the time? No offence shinyA, but it sounds like the people your playing are just better then you. Why does other top protosses win over top zergs all the time and vice versa? Don't use yourself as an example to call out an imbalance please, it's honestly pretty stupid. Don't care what it sounds like, I've beaten and played almost every "top" zerg player that plays on NA. But please, show me examples of P's beating Z's. Why is there only 1 P in the top 16 of the super tournament? Why did Z do so well at MLG? Counter my points, I listed why I feel the way I do and you don't attempt to refute any of my arguments. What's "honestly pretty stupid" is you making assumptions when you really have no clue what you're talking about =)
Don't complain about Imbalance ShinYa. This is a toss player to a toss player. We are freaken great. Our pros like incontrol, Tyler, Naniwa(even tho watchnig Nani losing to slush is MLG was painful) and white-ra don't complain about imbalance we shouldn't either. If it takes 10 times more skill for us to beat a whiner zerg, we will reach that skill and crush them with a smile. Don't fall into the Idra mentatility, practice more and win more.
|
On June 10 2011 17:57 .Enigma. wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2011 17:05 shinyA wrote:On June 10 2011 16:19 HolyArrow wrote:On June 10 2011 14:11 shinyA wrote:Like, I never really "rage" about imbalance, even when P, at the start, was weaker than T and Z because back then I could look at a game that I lost and figure out why I lost and how to react in situations to change the outcome. But now, PvZ is literally impossible to win. On any map not named Shakuras or Tal Darim, I can't secure a natural without going either 3WG/SG or 3WG/DT both of which are countered by a simple spore and both builds pretty much give them a timing to kill me or give them free reign to just mass drone to 70 and then non stop attack me. The timing Zerg's can hit are ridiculously broken, 2 base roach push after rushing 45 drones is broken. 2 base hydra ling is broken if P does any sort of WG expand whether it be a void ray or dark templar. Any sort of muta / ling build can coin flip win if you try to go early robo, if that happens P will never get a third up. And even if I just do a 3 WG expand and they don't losirafuck me they can just take 4 base and build a zillion drones and unless I do some all in gateway timing I can't stop it. I think it's hilarious though how when Zergs were crying about Protoss being imba ZvP was still a winnable matchup for them, it wasn't impossible and every competent Protoss was saying the same thing .. " you aren't doin it right". Now though, win PvZ is unwinnable you hardly hear anything from the P players. The problem is though, I've gone over everything and there ARE NO BUILDS THAT DON'T PUT ME AT A NEAR UNWINNABLE DISADVANTAGE unless I'm going all in of course. It's such a joke, I watch games where I play perfectly and I can't figure out how to change anything or why I lost other than the fact that Z is broken. The shitty zerg's I'm losing to ... it's such a joke. I hate this game Protoss here. I hate it when anyone calls something broken, even more so when a fellow Toss does because it gives me less justification to make fun of the "Zerg QQ" stereotype Whenever someone gives their "I've tried everything and nothing works, boo hoo! Race X is broken! QQ" sob story, it makes my head hurt. How do you think, at the top level, Protoss players beat Zergs, Zergs far better than the ones you're facing? I know it's tempting to give in to frustration, but come on... there is so much evidence that PvZ isn't broken that using your own experiences, no matter how frustrating they may be, to justify your "PvZ is broken" opinion is flat out wrong (this argument applies to anyone whining about a broken matchup.. it's very likely that it isn't). Why not post to the strategy section with replays? You're obviously doing stuff wrong. Protoss' don't win at a high level. I'm grandmaster and I play against top zergs all the time? No offence shinyA, but it sounds like the people your playing are just better then you. Why does other top protosses win over top zergs all the time and vice versa? Don't use yourself as an example to call out an imbalance please, it's honestly pretty stupid.
I have to side with shinyA here, and although most of you will think it's biased, there is PLENTY of example at the top level that he is correct. MLG? 2 protoss in the top 16, one being arguably the best player in the planet, and the other undoubtedly the best protoss outside of korea. Super Tournament? A single protoss in the top 16, who SHOULD have been eliminated if Leenock was smart enough to not split up his roaches and broods when he basically had the ace match won.
The state of the game has completely shifted to the point where Zerg is being constantly shown as the best race. I honestly even feel that Terrans are much worse off, to the point where if they don't kill the zerg or do a ridiculous amount of damage early on, they actually cannot win if the Zerg players properly.
Between the counter-attack/hyper-aggression focused style and things like baneling bombs (in min lines, on armies and burrowed), mass doom drops (one upgrade = 30 dropships instantly), being extremely more mobile than the other two races, having great core units (roach/muta/ling), being the best macro race but also being able to hold a lot of attacks with minimal preparation due to spawn larva, having the best caster in the game AND having a map pool that greatly benefits the strengths of the race, it's hard to argue against Z > T and P right now.
Not saying necessary a game imbalance, but certainly a state of the game imbalance. And while looking at it, it's honestly hard to see what protoss could do differently. I was saying give up hydras and use baneling bombs way back in season 3, I was telling people to use nydus more and to never engage and to not just sit in your base and attack. As soon as the infestor buff hit, I knew it would be game changing. Not saying I'm a genius or anything (I would go to the GSL if I was  ), but there was always something that I knew Zergs could do that they just wouldn't, instead sticking with their roach hydra corruptor.
There's honestly nothing I can see protoss doing right now. You're stuck between relying on being way better than your opponent to win, or all-inning. Can't see (and havn't seen) a protoss beat an equally skilled zerg in a long straight up game in ages.
|
Nothing like the Golds telling the Grandmasters what to do. I think it is pretty clear that Toss is a lot less scary after the warp gate nerf, which lets both terrans, and especially zergs, play much more greedily in the early game with relative inconsequence.
Not to mention the new Idra Roach/Immortal build :-)
|
On June 10 2011 22:12 xbankx wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2011 18:16 shinyA wrote:On June 10 2011 17:57 .Enigma. wrote:On June 10 2011 17:05 shinyA wrote:On June 10 2011 16:19 HolyArrow wrote:On June 10 2011 14:11 shinyA wrote:Like, I never really "rage" about imbalance, even when P, at the start, was weaker than T and Z because back then I could look at a game that I lost and figure out why I lost and how to react in situations to change the outcome. But now, PvZ is literally impossible to win. On any map not named Shakuras or Tal Darim, I can't secure a natural without going either 3WG/SG or 3WG/DT both of which are countered by a simple spore and both builds pretty much give them a timing to kill me or give them free reign to just mass drone to 70 and then non stop attack me. The timing Zerg's can hit are ridiculously broken, 2 base roach push after rushing 45 drones is broken. 2 base hydra ling is broken if P does any sort of WG expand whether it be a void ray or dark templar. Any sort of muta / ling build can coin flip win if you try to go early robo, if that happens P will never get a third up. And even if I just do a 3 WG expand and they don't losirafuck me they can just take 4 base and build a zillion drones and unless I do some all in gateway timing I can't stop it. I think it's hilarious though how when Zergs were crying about Protoss being imba ZvP was still a winnable matchup for them, it wasn't impossible and every competent Protoss was saying the same thing .. " you aren't doin it right". Now though, win PvZ is unwinnable you hardly hear anything from the P players. The problem is though, I've gone over everything and there ARE NO BUILDS THAT DON'T PUT ME AT A NEAR UNWINNABLE DISADVANTAGE unless I'm going all in of course. It's such a joke, I watch games where I play perfectly and I can't figure out how to change anything or why I lost other than the fact that Z is broken. The shitty zerg's I'm losing to ... it's such a joke. I hate this game Protoss here. I hate it when anyone calls something broken, even more so when a fellow Toss does because it gives me less justification to make fun of the "Zerg QQ" stereotype Whenever someone gives their "I've tried everything and nothing works, boo hoo! Race X is broken! QQ" sob story, it makes my head hurt. How do you think, at the top level, Protoss players beat Zergs, Zergs far better than the ones you're facing? I know it's tempting to give in to frustration, but come on... there is so much evidence that PvZ isn't broken that using your own experiences, no matter how frustrating they may be, to justify your "PvZ is broken" opinion is flat out wrong (this argument applies to anyone whining about a broken matchup.. it's very likely that it isn't). Why not post to the strategy section with replays? You're obviously doing stuff wrong. Protoss' don't win at a high level. I'm grandmaster and I play against top zergs all the time? No offence shinyA, but it sounds like the people your playing are just better then you. Why does other top protosses win over top zergs all the time and vice versa? Don't use yourself as an example to call out an imbalance please, it's honestly pretty stupid. Don't care what it sounds like, I've beaten and played almost every "top" zerg player that plays on NA. But please, show me examples of P's beating Z's. Why is there only 1 P in the top 16 of the super tournament? Why did Z do so well at MLG? Counter my points, I listed why I feel the way I do and you don't attempt to refute any of my arguments. What's "honestly pretty stupid" is you making assumptions when you really have no clue what you're talking about =) Don't complain about Imbalance ShinYa. This is a toss player to a toss player. We are freaken great. Our pros like incontrol, Tyler, Naniwa(even tho watchnig Nani losing to slush is MLG was painful) and white-ra don't complain about imbalance we shouldn't either. If it takes 10 times more skill for us to beat a whiner zerg, we will reach that skill and crush them with a smile. Don't fall into the Idra mentatility, practice more and win more.
I totally agree with this it sum everything up, protoss is good, zerg is good, and terran is good, people just want justification for why they lose, so they dont blame it on themselves they blame the game.
Btw Slush is really good and rather underrated so give him some slack he is really good and has the skill to win.
|
I seriously can't figure out how anyone thinks they understand balance better than blizzard, or even pro-gamers.I'm starting to believe there's no such thing as imbalanced, just spoiled players. This is reminding me of WoW were every week another class/talent build was "unbeatable in area Nerf please"
Why don't people take more of stance like Day9 or oGsTheWind, and just adapt to (inevitable) change?
|
On June 09 2011 20:32 FlaminGinjaNinja wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2011 02:19 ixi.genocide wrote:On June 06 2011 11:00 Vansetsu wrote:So... I have kind of felt this way since the roach got +1 (4) range buff. Zerg played correctly at the highest mechanical and strategical level is very strong. In particular against a Protoss. Discluding early to maybe mid game, I feel like even the best Zerg can generate too much income and and can either re-macro strong unit compositions too fast or stockpile and do other things. I tried to think of a solution for this for a long time, and finally I think I may have come up with a feasible concept - Charging resources for every creep tumor put on the map (initial tumor possibley being free), and maybe charging a slow mineral rate, ala an scv repairing something, for overlords dropping creep. I have no idea what the amounts charged would be, maybe something like 25m? Creep is free vision, free expansion denial, and free speed advantage. I think forcing the Zerg to passively spend a little of the massive amount of excess minerals they can macro up in SC2 and making creep something of "resource based value" to attack would maybe make the PvZ match up a tad bit more balanced (before the roach range increase, stalkers could harass roaches without speed and kite with good micro ect.) It also makes a stockpiled zerg a little more accountable for how he chooses to engage with units, even if they are in a "throw away army". However, I'm not sure how this would adversely effect TvZ, as creep is often quickly and easily destroyed... but it's something I have been thinking about a lot. I'd love to hear some intelligent, non bias feedback on the idea. (if that's possible ) Really, the bias in your post kind of makes it hard to come from an unbiased point of view. You state that you believe zerg macro to be too strong; This may or may not be true and is the basis for your suggested nerf. As a zerg player I would love it if creep was removed from the game and some units like the queen and the hydralisk were buffed/changed to compensate. Btw, you have a unit that is invisible and can see creep tumors. Use it. I can sort of see where the orgional poster is coming from about Zerg being able to re-max really quickly. But thats the way Zerg was designed to be played. a 200/200 zerg army will be crushed by a 200/200 protoss army because zerg units are generally weaker, so zerg relies on being able to re-max and do the 300 food push, and even then it is sometimes not enough to kill the origional 200/200 protoss army. I don't think creep should be removed or cost money, it's a good tool for zerg to use and gives zergs a change against T and P armies with the vision and speed advantage. Also as the second poster says "you have a unit that is invisible and can see creep tumors. Use it."
I don't think any of you understood what I was saying.
First of all I wasn't talking about my PvZ. My masters level PvZ is somewhat irrelevant to the topic, and certainly not it's focus.
My post was about how I felt about Zerg mechanics in general. When watching high level games, I find that even the best Zergs and ones with strong macro have an over abundance of resources after a certain period. While I agree Zerg armies should to an extent be able to re-max into something else, I feel like a lot of Zergs can get away with very sloppy engagements. I feel that a throw-away army should at least have to be used effectively.
The other part of my argument which was somewhat intertwined, was to make creep something of resource value, therefore making it something worth (in resources) protecting/harassing in correlation to the amount of income they produce. I basically posted this for feedback on a interesting concept - I did not post it because I am upset at my PvZ.......... seriously -_- lol.
I think it would add a bit more depth to the matchup and make creep something a little more worth defending, while possibly slightly slowing down some Z timings if they want to have 5 creep tumors covering the entire map for vision or dumping creep highways ect. It also give P another good reason to attempt to take to the map.
Regardless this post was for discussing the idea of the concept, why it is good or bad. I just thought it was an interesting idea, and was hoping for some discussion under that pretense.
|
On June 10 2011 17:05 shinyA wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2011 16:19 HolyArrow wrote:On June 10 2011 14:11 shinyA wrote:Like, I never really "rage" about imbalance, even when P, at the start, was weaker than T and Z because back then I could look at a game that I lost and figure out why I lost and how to react in situations to change the outcome. But now, PvZ is literally impossible to win. On any map not named Shakuras or Tal Darim, I can't secure a natural without going either 3WG/SG or 3WG/DT both of which are countered by a simple spore and both builds pretty much give them a timing to kill me or give them free reign to just mass drone to 70 and then non stop attack me. The timing Zerg's can hit are ridiculously broken, 2 base roach push after rushing 45 drones is broken. 2 base hydra ling is broken if P does any sort of WG expand whether it be a void ray or dark templar. Any sort of muta / ling build can coin flip win if you try to go early robo, if that happens P will never get a third up. And even if I just do a 3 WG expand and they don't losirafuck me they can just take 4 base and build a zillion drones and unless I do some all in gateway timing I can't stop it. I think it's hilarious though how when Zergs were crying about Protoss being imba ZvP was still a winnable matchup for them, it wasn't impossible and every competent Protoss was saying the same thing .. " you aren't doin it right". Now though, win PvZ is unwinnable you hardly hear anything from the P players. The problem is though, I've gone over everything and there ARE NO BUILDS THAT DON'T PUT ME AT A NEAR UNWINNABLE DISADVANTAGE unless I'm going all in of course. It's such a joke, I watch games where I play perfectly and I can't figure out how to change anything or why I lost other than the fact that Z is broken. The shitty zerg's I'm losing to ... it's such a joke. I hate this game Protoss here. I hate it when anyone calls something broken, even more so when a fellow Toss does because it gives me less justification to make fun of the "Zerg QQ" stereotype Whenever someone gives their "I've tried everything and nothing works, boo hoo! Race X is broken! QQ" sob story, it makes my head hurt. How do you think, at the top level, Protoss players beat Zergs, Zergs far better than the ones you're facing? I know it's tempting to give in to frustration, but come on... there is so much evidence that PvZ isn't broken that using your own experiences, no matter how frustrating they may be, to justify your "PvZ is broken" opinion is flat out wrong (this argument applies to anyone whining about a broken matchup.. it's very likely that it isn't). Why not post to the strategy section with replays? You're obviously doing stuff wrong. Protoss' don't win at a high level. I'm grandmaster and I play against top zergs all the time?
I'd love to see the replay where you say you cant imagine you couldve done anything better. I'm having a reallllly hard time believing that.
|
On June 10 2011 19:50 Probe1 wrote:Pretty funny you bring up the NA server to someone from Sweden. The questions still there. Many people in the grandmaster leagues are Protoss. I don't see any imbalance, just older build orders being countered after a few months of analysis. Show nested quote +On June 10 2011 17:21 Complete wrote:
I've noticed from watching streams/replays that tosses in their wallin always put the gateway tugging the wall so it doesnt have the zealot by it. It can't be a coincidence that pretty much all of them do this - but I don't know why. Could somebody enlighten me (I realize it is a bit of a tiny detail in the grand scheme of things)? Which is safer? I'd rather have one direction units can come in from than 2 10/10 times.
nono
there is still only 1 gap, but they always put it by the core rather than the gateway.
|
On June 11 2011 00:25 Vansetsu wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2011 20:32 FlaminGinjaNinja wrote:On June 09 2011 02:19 ixi.genocide wrote:On June 06 2011 11:00 Vansetsu wrote:So... I have kind of felt this way since the roach got +1 (4) range buff. Zerg played correctly at the highest mechanical and strategical level is very strong. In particular against a Protoss. Discluding early to maybe mid game, I feel like even the best Zerg can generate too much income and and can either re-macro strong unit compositions too fast or stockpile and do other things. I tried to think of a solution for this for a long time, and finally I think I may have come up with a feasible concept - Charging resources for every creep tumor put on the map (initial tumor possibley being free), and maybe charging a slow mineral rate, ala an scv repairing something, for overlords dropping creep. I have no idea what the amounts charged would be, maybe something like 25m? Creep is free vision, free expansion denial, and free speed advantage. I think forcing the Zerg to passively spend a little of the massive amount of excess minerals they can macro up in SC2 and making creep something of "resource based value" to attack would maybe make the PvZ match up a tad bit more balanced (before the roach range increase, stalkers could harass roaches without speed and kite with good micro ect.) It also makes a stockpiled zerg a little more accountable for how he chooses to engage with units, even if they are in a "throw away army". However, I'm not sure how this would adversely effect TvZ, as creep is often quickly and easily destroyed... but it's something I have been thinking about a lot. I'd love to hear some intelligent, non bias feedback on the idea. (if that's possible ) Really, the bias in your post kind of makes it hard to come from an unbiased point of view. You state that you believe zerg macro to be too strong; This may or may not be true and is the basis for your suggested nerf. As a zerg player I would love it if creep was removed from the game and some units like the queen and the hydralisk were buffed/changed to compensate. Btw, you have a unit that is invisible and can see creep tumors. Use it. I can sort of see where the orgional poster is coming from about Zerg being able to re-max really quickly. But thats the way Zerg was designed to be played. a 200/200 zerg army will be crushed by a 200/200 protoss army because zerg units are generally weaker, so zerg relies on being able to re-max and do the 300 food push, and even then it is sometimes not enough to kill the origional 200/200 protoss army. I don't think creep should be removed or cost money, it's a good tool for zerg to use and gives zergs a change against T and P armies with the vision and speed advantage. Also as the second poster says "you have a unit that is invisible and can see creep tumors. Use it." I don't think any of you understood what I was saying. First of all I wasn't talking about my PvZ. My masters level PvZ is somewhat irrelevant to the topic, and certainly not it's focus. My post was about how I felt about Zerg mechanics in general. When watching high level games, I find that even the best Zergs and ones with strong macro have an over abundance of resources after a certain period. While I agree Zerg armies should to an extent be able to re-max into something else, I feel like a lot of Zergs can get away with very sloppy engagements. I feel that a throw-away army should at least have to be used effectively. The other part of my argument which was somewhat intertwined, was to make creep something of resource value, therefore making it something worth (in resources) protecting/harassing in correlation to the amount of income they produce. I basically posted this for feedback on a interesting concept - I did not post it because I am upset at my PvZ.......... seriously -_- lol. I think it would add a bit more depth to the matchup and make creep something a little more worth defending, while possibly slightly slowing down some Z timings if they want to have 5 creep tumors covering the entire map for vision or dumping creep highways ect. It also give P another good reason to attempt to take to the map. Regardless this post was for discussing the idea of the concept, why it is good or bad. I just thought it was an interesting idea, and was hoping for some discussion under that pretense.
When both races say the others OP i think its safe to conclude that the match up is pretty balanced for the moment.
|
Why don't Raven Hunter Seeker missles see use to target down Sentries?
|
Random question, hopefully this is the right place:
TvP, when going against a standard deathball style toss (stalker/sentry/collo/zeal), and using marauder/ghost/marine/viking/medivac... what's the general ratio of medivacs to vikings, and about how many ghosts do I want to have?
I feel like I mgiht overproduce ghosts, and underproduce vikings.
Also, if in my noobishness I'm missing many contributing factors, please shout.
Thank you!
ALso if this is the wrong place, please yell at me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
