Designated Balance Discussion Thread - Page 1092

On September 16 2014 13:37 brickrd wrote:

ah well i only pop in here once in a while so i guess i dont know who to watch out for. i understand a lot of people whine about races/balance/cheese/etc, but i dont understand treating me as one of those people when i literally never said anything negative about cheese nor terran nor anything really... if he wants people with dumb whiny views to argue with it's pretty easy to do that at the battle.net forums

On September 16 2014 15:50 Thieving Magpie wrote:


You came into a discussion forum spouting something self-contradicting. I called you out on it. You dislike having your statement broken down because you know what I said was true. It's a normal reaction for people to get offended when presented with their own facts before they fully think about it themselves.

If you hadn't used the examples you presented, then your hypothesis would have been more sound. But then it would be a hypothesis that would be unable to state that things like 6pools and proxy gates were cheese. And that I can't abide by.

On September 16 2014 16:17 brickrd wrote:
repeating that you "broke my statement down" and that i'm frightened of your logic doesn't make it true, nor does it add anything to the discussion, so you can stop now. i'm not really interested in silly internet alpha male theatrics and i'm going to guess that no one else is either

the irony here is that you're actually the one whose reading comprehension seems to be lacking. you seem to be arguing that the builds i listed are "easy to scout," which has nothing to do with my point as i never said they're "hard to scout" or that they're overpowered due to unscoutability. what i said was that i consider cheese to be builds which already have aggressive potential on the map by the time you can identify them through normal scouting of your opponent's base, which as i said is limited by the game engine in how fast you can physically reach your opponent

by the way, i don't think you know what a "hypothesis" is. stating a subjective opinion about the definition of a slang word is not a "hypothesis" nor is it something possible to be disproven. could it be that since you realized i'm not complaining about balance or calling anything overpowered you're now resorting to trying to win a pointless semantic debate over whether i "contradicted myself" (which i didn't)?

On September 16 2014 16:27 Thieving Magpie wrote:


You said:

" to me cheese is a build you do thats banking entirely on having aggressive potential before your opponent scouts your base with a normal timing"

And then I asked you what you consider a normal timing.

You then responded:

"normal timing is when the ovie reaches his base"

Which I then said:

"So you're saying it's cheesy if Zerg can't spot it with just an overlord scout"

You then replied:

"again you're trying to make this about racial whine or something when im only posting my opinions academically"

A.) I never accused you of whining. I asked you what a normal timing is, which you used to define as how to describe something as cheese. You then told me that the timing is overlord scout. Hence my snide retort when I realized that you were one of those people that didn't actually think through with what they were saying.

B.) My first 2 responses to you was literally breaking down what you physically typed and posted on to a balance discussion forum. It literally asked you point blank what you meant when you said the words you said. You literally are the one saying the accusations. I did not accuse you of only using OV scout timings to define what is cheesy play--you literally said it yourself. At no point did I even accuse you of anything.

There is nothing passive aggressive with asking someone what they mean when they say something.
There is nothing accusatory with asking someone what they mean when they say something.

If you do not like how you sound when you say something, think about it before saying it.

So you're saying it's cheesy if Zerg can't spot it with just an overlord scout? Got it.

On September 16 2014 09:22 brickrd wrote:

huh? normal timing is when the ovie reaches his base. its limited by game mechanics, overlord has a set speed. sounds like youre trying to paint me as some kind of build or race whiner when all im doing is defining a term, which is very annoying. i used very specific examples, 2gate, 6pool, 2rax all of these things are going to be in your face by the time you scout them, theres no option to make your overlord go faster. 9/10 worker scout to their base isnt going to help either because in zvz its terrible/unnecessary and in the other matchups you still have to confirm that its not expo first and what kind of proxy it is

On September 16 2014 16:36 Thieving Magpie wrote:


That's your words, not mine.

Heck your argument to why you're right is: "overlord has a set speed."

You then use specific examples of 3 easy to scout builds. The only time you never see it is if you don't scout with a worker.

That is what you said.

On September 16 2014 16:41 brickrd wrote:

1) again, i never said that i was "right" about anything, if you actually read what i said you'll see that from the beginning i posted that everyone has their own personal definition of cheese and i'm only stating my own subjective definition
2) again, i never said that cheese is defined by being "hard to scout" or even that there is anything bad about cheese, so trying to argue with me about how difficult it is to scout doesn't speak to any relevant point

proxy 2rax, proxy 2gate and 6pool are all builds used vs z. if we were talking about cheesy builds being used against other races then the standard would obviously have nothing to do with overlord speed. the point i was making is that i consider a build cheesy when (as you kindly quoted) its aggressive potential is already on the map by the time it can be reasonably identified.

you cannot rely on worker scout to identify proxies, it is not possible to scout all viable locations and due to blind luck you will still miss them sometimes. as i said, by the time your worker reaches their base and confirms there is a proxy there will already be aggressive potential on the map, which was the entire point from the beginning

On September 16 2014 16:47 Thieving Magpie wrote:


Well I'm glad you're willing to say you aren't right about a contradiction. I'm even willing to pretend that even though you're now saying

"by the time your worker reaches their base and confirms there is a proxy there will already be aggressive potential on the map"

That you didn't say:

"all of these things are going to be in your face by the time you scout them, theres no option to make your overlord go faster."

I mean, "In your face" and "aggressive potential" mean the same thing to you right?

On September 16 2014 16:52 brickrd wrote:
there was never a contradiction. the reason i'm not right is because you can be neither right nor wrong about a subjective definition of a slang word

yes, i meant essentially the same thing by those two statements. by the time you scout those builds there are going to be production facilities near your base creating units which will imminently attack you, and "in your face" was a colorful way of alluding to that. i'm sorry if you can't understand everyday english metaphors, maybe you aren't a native speaker(?)

anyway, i've made my point clear as day a hundred times over to anyone with proper reading comprehension and this conversation isn't going anywhere other than you desperately trying to find some linguistic loophole so you can release the "i won an internet argument" endorphins, so i'm pretty much done with this. if you have anything to actually discuss about starcraft feel free to post that

On September 16 2014 17:30 Chillidawg wrote:
This discussion went completely off track. As I said, 2 rax openers are becoming more and more standard, since they are so strong, they come in different forms and are hard to scout. Looking at pros I see that even if they scout the opener, it can still do a lot of damage, and I feel like it's the agressive opener (avoiding the term "cheese" for obvious reasons) that have the most impact and the highest success rate, even if scouted directly with a overlord.

On September 16 2014 17:46 TheDwf wrote:

Statistical evidence for that?

On September 16 2014 17:56 Chillidawg wrote:


No statistical evidence for it, as I said, just a feeling. I would love to see some statistics in pro games myself aswell.

On September 16 2014 21:38 Wombat_NI wrote:
I haven't seen a failed 2 rax in the 2/3 months I have been following tournaments again. Granted a lot of it was in PL, I'm not sure why people continually failed to hold even with scouts/good reads.

Perhaps the eSF Zergs had a lot more experience having played from the beginning of WoL as opposed to these Kespa upstarts?

On September 16 2014 21:40 Hider wrote:


I definitely think this is true as well. At least around from the second half of 2011-2013, 2-rax was a rare build. Today, it's definitely semi-standard.
Regardless of whether zergs will improve at it, it's still a lame build - just like scv pulls vs toss, which protosses still struggles with. In my opinion, lame builds should b nerfed, and diversity should be added in different ways.

On September 16 2014 23:04 TokO wrote:
I think that the most frustrating thing about 2rax is the back-end qualiy of life features of Terran that makes it quite superior to similar early-tech strategies from other races. I'd love a nerf to repair costs, salvage and movement speed of lifted buildings.

The strength of the build isn't an issue I think, it's just how much of what's invested that's possible to retain.

On September 16 2014 23:00 Thezzy wrote:

All-ins are part of the game. Without them, everyone would play greedy and nothing exciting would happen in the first ten minutes. The meta would change over time and one day, an attack that happens at 10 minutes is considered an early all-in and the whole thing repeats itself. There will always be all-ins.

Although I do agree they aren't always fun to watch and some restrict gameplay too much, I don't think flatout nerfing them would benefit the game.

Currently 2rax is punishing Zergs left and right as many of them go Hatch first, don't scout proxy locations and just drone up. This is no different than an early pool play vs CC first. The existence of the 2rax is something Zergs are going to have to take into account. Since the 2rax was virtually non-existent in 2011-2013 (and it was faster before then) it should hardly be nerfed now that is making a resurgence. Most likely, the current meta is much more greedy compared to the early days and thus, 2rax is catching more Zergs offguard. Perhaps the change Zergs need to make is to not go Hatch first every single time.
Zergs similarly do not go Hatch first against Protoss all the time because of the existence of a Cannon Rush.
It might not be as economic to go Pool first but that's the whole point of the threat. It only needs to exist.

For the same reason, Terran absolutely MUST have either 6 Marines, a Widow Mine or a Turret in their mineral line by 5:05.
If they don't, the fastest Proxy Oracle play will kill the Terran then and there, game over. Obviously not every Terran does this every single game and thusly they are taking a risk (which they can take as not every Protoss will go for Proxy Oracle).
Zergs are similarly taking a risk by going Hatch first and droning against a potential 2rax.

I've seen Zergs hold it just fine by going for Pool first and getting Queens and Spine Crawlers.
Of course this eats into Zerg's economy, but you cannot expect a player to hold off an all-in like a 2rax without having to make some sacrifices. A 2rax that doesn't succeed delays Terran's tech and expansion considerably as well.
Maybe not as much as Zergs would like but at the same time, there are plenty of all-ins available for Zerg.

For me, it keeps the game exciting because the possibilities are there.
Zerg could go for a Roach/Bane bust, Terran could go for a 2rax, Protoss could go for a 7g Blink.
Seeing how the pro's deal with both macro games and all-in/micro games is what keeps things interesting.

On September 16 2014 22:26 Thieving Magpie wrote:


Nestea won a GSL when raxes built faster, required no depot, and maps were smaller so Terran would just pull scvs easier.

And that was 2010